LIBRARY 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 


Class 


IMPROVING  THE   QUALITY 
OF  WHEAT 


BY 


T.  L.  LYON 


Thesis  presented  to  the  University  Faculty  of  Cornell  University 
for  the  Degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy 


904 


IMPROVING  THE   QUALITY 
OF  WHEAT 


BY 


T.  L.  LYON 

11 


Thesis  presented  to  the  University  Faculty  of  Cornell  University 
for  the  Degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy 


Also  printed  as  Bulletin  No.  78,  Bureau  of  Plant  Industry, 
U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture 


PREFACE. 

I  wish  to  express  my  appreciation  of  the  guidance  of  Professor 
I.  P.  Roberts,  Professor  G.  C.  Caldwell  and  Professor  Thomas 
F.  Hunt,  who  constituted  the  committee  having  my  work  in 
charge,  also  of  the  advice  given  by  Dean  L,.  H.  Bailey  and  the 
assistance  of  Mr.  G.  N.  Lauman.  For  the  analytical  work, 
extending  through  a  period  of  seven  years  and  involving  several 
thousand  chemical  determinations,  I  am  indebted  to  Professor  S. 
Avery,  Mr.  R.  S.  Hiltner,  Professor  R.  W.  Thacher,  Mr.  Y. 
Nikaido,  Miss  Rachael  Corr,  Mr.  H.  B.  Slade  and  Mr.  G.  H. 
Walker.  Mr.  Alvin  Keyser  has  kept  records  of  the  wheat 
breeding  plats  and  Mr.  E.  G.  Montgomery  has  assisted  in 
keeping  other  records. 


192221 


CONTEXTS. 


Page. 

Object  of  the  investigation 13 

Part  I.— Historical: 

Some  conditions  affecting  the  composition  and  yield  of  wheat 17 

Composition  as  affected  by  time  of  cutting 17 

Influence  of  immature  seed  upon  yield 20 

Influence  of  climate  upon  composition  and  yield . . .  „ 20 

Influence  of  soil  upon  composition  and  yield 23 

Influence  of  soil  moisture  upon  composition  and  yield 29 

Influence  of  size  or  weight  of  the  seed-wheat  kernel  upon  the  crop  yield.. .  30 

Relation  of  size  of  kernel  to  nitrogen  content 35 

Influence  of  the  specific  gravity  of  the  seed  kernel  upon  yield 37 

Relation  of  specific  gravity  of  kernel  to  nitrogen  content ^ 39 

Conditions  affecting  the  production  of  nitrogen  in  the  grain 40 

Part  II. — Experimental: 

Some  properties  of  the  wheat  kernel 49 

Yield  of  nitrogen  per  acre 72 

Method  for  selection  to  increase  the  quantity  of  proteids  in  the  kernel 76 

A  basis  for  selection  to  increase  the  quantity  of  proteids  in  the  endosperm  of 

the  kernel 84 

Improvement  in  the  quality  of  the  gluten 91 

Some  results  of  breeding  to  increase  the  content  of  proteid  nitrogen 95 

Yield  of  g.  ain  as  affected  by  susceptibility  to  cold 100 

Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain  as  affected  by  length  of  growing  period. .  104 

Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant Ill 

Summary  and  conclusions 118 

9 


OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 

JC4LIFQR! 


TABLES  OF  EXPERIMENTS. 


Page. 
TABLE  1 .  Analyses  of  kernels  of  high  and  of  low  specific  gravity 49 

2.  Proportion  of  light  and  of  heavy  seed 50 

3.  Analyses  of  large,  heavy  kernels  and  of  small,  light  kernels 50 

4.  Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content  of 

kernels.    Crop  of  1902 52 

5.  Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen 

content  of  kernels.     Crop  of  1902 56 

6.  Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  specific 

gravities  of  kernels.     Crop  of  1902 56 

7.  Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  weight  of 

average  kernel.     Crop  of  1902 57 

8.  Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen. 

Crop  of  1903 59 

9.  Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  pro- 

teid nitrogen.     Crop  of  1603 • 64 

10.  Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  kernel.     Crop 

of  1903 65 

11.  Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average 

kernel.     Crop  of  1903 71 

12.  Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  grams  of  proteid 

nitrogen  in  average  kernel.     Crop  of  1903 72 

13.  Crops  grown  from  light  and  from  heavy  seed  for  four  years 73 

14.  Analyses  of  twenty-five  spikes  of  wheat,  showing  their  total  organic  nitro- 

gen         77 

15.  Analyses  of  twenty-three  spikes  of  wheat,  showing  their  percentage  of 

proteid  nitrogen 77 

16.  Analyses  of  twenty-one  plants,  showing  total  nitrogen  and  proteid  nitro- 

gen         78 

17.  Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  showing  difference  in  proteid  nitrogen 79 

18.  Variations  in  content  of  proteids 80 

19.  Relation  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  to  proteid  nitrogen 85 

20.  Summary  of  analyses,  showing  relation  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen 

to  proteid  nitrogen 88 

21.  Relation  of  proteid  nitrogen  to  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen 88 

22.  Summary  of  analyses,  showing  relation  of  proteid  nitrogen  to  gliadin-plus- 

glutenin  nitrogen 91 

23.  Ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  content  of  their  sum  increases 92 

24.  Summary  of  analyses,  showing  the  ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  con- 

tent of  their  sum  increases 94 

25.  Analyses    showing   transmission  of    nitrogen  from    one    generation    to 

another 96 

11 


12  TABLES    OF    EXPERIMENTS. 

Page. 

TABLE  26.  Summary  of  analyses,  showing  transmission  of  nitrogen  from  one  genera- 
tion to  another 98 

27.  Analyses  showing  transmission  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  average  kernel .  99 

28.  Analyses  showing  transmission  of  kernel  weight 100 

29.  Yields  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  killed  in  each  family.  .  101 

30.  Summary  of  yields  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  killed  in 

each  family 104 

31.  Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of 

growing  period 105 

32.  Summary  of  yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according 

to  length  of  growing  period Ill 

33.  Summary  of   nitrogen  content,  etc.,  tabulated  according  to  yield  per 

plant Ill 

34.  Summary  of  yield,  etc.,  tabulated  according  to  nitrogen  content Ill 

35.  Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant 112 

36.  Summary  of  relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant  .  118 

37.  Relation  of  yield  of  plant  to  height  and  tillering,  and  to  the  yield  per  head  .  1 18 

38.  Relation  of  yield  per  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant,  and  to 

weight  of  average  kernel 118 


B.  P.  I.-158.  V.  P.  P.  I. -133. 

IMPROVING  THE  QUALITY  OF  WHEAT. 


OBJECT  OF  THE  INVESTIGATION. 

Efforts  to  improve  the  wheat  plant  have  been  numerous  and  have 
accomplished  important  results.  The  work  of  Fultz,  Clawson, 
Rudy,  Wellman,  Powers,  Hayne,  Bolton,  Cobb,  Green,  and  Hays  in 
improving  by  selection,  and  of  Pringle,  Blount,  Schindel,  Saunders, 
Farrar,  Jones,  Carleton,  and  Hays  in  improving  by  hybridization, 
has  resulted  in  giving  this  country  many  prolific  strains  and  varieties 
of  wheat,  while  Garton  Brothers,  of  England,  Farrar,  of  New  South 
Wales,  Vilmorin,  of  France,  Rimpau,  of  Germany,  and  others  have 
accomplished  the  same  for  other  portions  of  the  world.  Attempts 
at  improvement  have,  however,  been  directed  primarily  toward  effect- 
ing an  increase  in  the  yield  rather  than  in  the  quality  of  the  crop. 
While  the  latter  property  has  not  been  entirely  lost  sight  of,  selection 
based  on  quality  has  never  been  applied  to  the  individual  plant,  but 
only  to  the  progeny  of  otherw^ise  desirable  plants. 

Why  selection  for  quality  of  grain  in  the  individual  plant  has  not 
gone  hand  in  hand  with  selection  for  other  desirable  properties  is 
perhaps  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  no  method  for  such  selection 
has  ever  been  devised.  Mr.  W.  Farrar,  of  Queanbeyen,  New  South 
Wales,  in  an  address  made  a  short  time  ago,  said : 

Before  we  can  make  any  considerable  progress  in  improving  the  quality  of  the  grain  of 
the  wheat  plant  we  shall  have  to  devise  a  method  for  making  a  fairly  correct  quantitative 
estimate  of  the  constituents  *  *  *  of  the  grain  of  a  single  plant  and  yet  have  seeds 
left  to  propagate  from  that  plant. 

In  devising  a  method  for  increasing  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  in 
wheat  it  becomes  desirable  to  know  the  causes  that  produce  variation 
in  this  constituent  of  the  kernel.  Numerous  experiments  and  obser- 
vations have  been  made  on  this  subject,  the  results  of  which  agree  in 
the  main  in  attributing  such  variation  to  the  following  conditions: 

(1)  Stage  of  development  of  the  kernel. 

(2)  Variation  in  temperature  of  different  regions. 

(3)  Variation  in  temperature  of  different  years  in  the  same  region. 

(4)  Variation  in  the  supply  and  form  of  soil  nitrogen. 

(5)  Variation  in  the  supply  of  soil  moisture. 

13 


14  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

All  of  these  factors  have  been  studied,  and  are  recognized  as  opera- 
tive. Nothing,  however,  appears  to  have  been  done  to  show  their 
influence  upon  the  actual  amount  of  nitrogen  taken  up  by  the  wheat 
plant  and  deposited  in  the  kernel.  This  is  really  the  point  of  greatest 
interest;  for  although  it  is  desirable  to  secure  a  wheat  of  greater  nutri- 
tive value,  it  should  not  be  done  at  the  sacrifice  of  yield  of  nitrogenous 
substance. 

Admitting  that  variation  in  the  nitrogen  content  of  wheat  is 
induced  by  the  conditions  mentioned,  it  is  essential  to  the  plant 
breeder  to  know  whether  a  high  or  low  nitrogen  content  may  be, 
under  similar  conditions,  a  characteristic  of  an  individual  plant; 
whether  this  quality  is  transmitted  to  the  offspring;  with  what  con- 
stant characteristics  it  is  correlated,  and  whether  a  high  percentage 
of  nitrogen  in  a  normal,  perfectly  matured  wheat  plant  is  an  indica- 
tion of  a  large  accumulation  of  nitrogen  by  that  plant. 

The  data  contained  in  this  paper  cover  the  points  mentioned,  and 
it  is  hoped  that  some  definite  information  has  been  gained  that  will 
lead  to  a  practical  solution  of  the  problem  of  improving  by  breeding 
the  quality  of  wheat  for  bread  making. 


I. 


HISTORICAL 


SOME  CONDITIONS  AFFECTING  THE  COMPOSI- 
TION AND  YIELD  OF  WHEAT. 


Experiments  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  different  conditions  upon 
the  composition  and  yield  of  wheat  have  been  conducted  mainly 
along  the  following  lines: 

(1)  Stage  of  growth  at  which  the  grain  is  harvested. 

(2)  Influence  of  immature  seed  upon  the  resulting  crop. 

(3)  Effect  of  climate. 

(4)  Effect  of  soil. 

(5)  Effect  of  soil  moisture. 

(6)  Influence  of  size  or  weight  of  seed  upon  the  resulting  crop. 

(7)  Influence  of  specific  gravity  of  seed  upon  the  resulting  crop. 

A  brief  summary  of  a  number  of  these  experiments  is  herewith 
given. 

COMPOSITION    AS    AFFECTED    BY    TIME    OF    CUTTING. 

In  1879,a  and  again  in  1892,6  Dr.  R.  C.  Kedzie  conducted  very 
careful  experiments  to  note  the  chemical  changes  that  occur  in  the 
wheat  kernel  during  its  formation  and  ripening.  These  agree  in 
the  main  in  showing  a  gradual  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  total 
nitrogen,  albuminoid  nitrogen,  and  non-albuminoid  nitrogen  from 
the  time  the  grain  set  to  the  time  the  kernel  was  ripe.  The  decrease 
in  all  of  these  constituents  was  much  more  rapid  during  the  first 
than  during  the  last  stages  of  this  development.  The  percentage 
of  ash  decreased  at  the  same  time. 

In  1897  Prof.  G.  L.  Teller c  carried  on  some  experiments  in  which 
he  covered  the  ground  already  gone  over  by  Doctor  Kedzie  and 
also  contributed  to  the  knowledge  of  the  subject  some  very  important 
data  concerning  the  proportion  of  the  various  proteids  contained 
in  the  wheat  kernel  during  the  process  of  development.  Teller 
found  that  the  proportion  of  total  nitrogen  in  the  dry  matter  steadily 
decreased  from  the  time  the  kernel  was  formed  up  to  about  a  week 
before  ripening,  but  that,  unlike  Doctor  Kedzie's  results,  it  gradually 
increased  from  that  time  on.  He  intimates  that  this  increase  before 
ripening  may  have  been  due  to  defective  sampling  and  hoped  to 

«  Report  of  Michigan  Board  of  Agriculture,  1881-82,  pp.  233-239. 
''  Michigan  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  101. 
<•  Arkansas  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  53. 

27889— No.  78—05 2  17 


18 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


repeat  the  experiment  to  remedy  this,  but  he  has  published  nothing 
further.  The  amid  nitrogen  continued  to  decrease  up  to  the  time  of 
ripening,  as  did  also  the  ash,  fats,  fiber,  dextrins,  and  pentosans. 
There  was  a  gradual  and  marked  increase  in  the  proportion  of  gliadin 
up  to  the  time  of  ripening,  and  a  somewhat  less  and  rather  irregular 
decrease  in  the  proportion  of  glutenin  during  the  same  period. 

Failyer  and  Willard  a  report  analyses  of  wheat  in  the  soft-dough 
stage  and  when  ripe.  The  ash,  crude  fiber,  fat,  and  the  total  and 
albuminoid '  nitrogen  were  higher  in  the  soft-dough  wheat,  and  the 
nitrogen-free  extract  and  non-albuminoid  nitrogen  were  higher  in 
the  ripe  wheat. 

Dietrich  and  Konig b  quote  results  from  five  experimenters — Reiset, 
Stockhardt,  Heinrich,  Now^acki,  and  Handtke.  Only  in  one  case 
(Heinrich)  is  there  a  constant  decrease  in  total  nitrogen  as  the  grain 
approaches  ripeness.  There  is  much  inconstancy  in  the  results,  there 
being  in  some  cases  a  decrease  in  nitrogen  between  the  milk  stage 
and  full  ripeness  and  sometimes  an  increase.  There  is  little  informa- 
tion to  be  gained  from  the  results  quoted  by  Dietrich  and  Konig. 

Kornicke  and  Werner  in  their  "Handbuch  des  Getreidebaues'^ 
refer  to  the  work  of  Stockhardt,  and  also  that  of  Heinrich,  to  show 
that  during  the  process  of  ripening  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  in 
the  wheat  kernel  gradually  diminishes,  as  does  also  the  percentage 
of  ash,  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  the  percentage  of  carbohydrates 
increases  during  the  same  period.  Heinrich  also  shows  by  a  state- 
ment of  the  number  of  grams  of  these  constituents  in  2,600  kernels 
at  different  stages  of  development  that  the  absolute  amount  of 
nitrogen  and  ash  increases  up  to  the  time  of  ripening,  and  that 
consequently  the  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  these  constituents 
is  due  to  the  rapid  increase  in  the  carbohydrates.  The  results 
obtained  by  Heinrich  appear  as  follows  when  tabulated: 


Stage  of  growth. 

Starch. 

Protein. 

Ash. 

Percentage 
in  100 
parts  of 
dry  matter 
of  kernel. 

Grams  in 
2,600 
kernels. 

Percentage 
in  100 
parts  of 
dry  matter 
of  kernel. 

Grams  in 
2,600 
kernels. 

Percentage 
in  100         Grams  in 
parts  of           2,600 
dry  matter     kernels, 
of  kernel. 

14  days  after  bloom  
Beginning  to  ripen  

61.44 
74.17 
75.66 
76.38 

22.0 
58.5 
67.0 
70.0 

14.05 
12.21 
11.82 
11.67 

5.0 
10.0 
10.5 
10.7 

2.48                  0.84 
2.14  I                1.70 
1.97                  1.75 
1.88  1                1.79 

Ripe 

Overripe  

Nedokutschajew^  analyzed  wheat  kernels  at  different  stages  of 
development  and  found  an  almost  uniform  decrease  in  the  percentage 

«  Kansas  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  32. 
&  Zusammensetzung  u.  Verdaulichkeit  der  Futtermittel,  1,  p.  419. 
«  Handbuch  des  Getreidebaues,  Berlin,  1884,  2,  pp.  474-476. 
<*Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  56  (1902),  pp.  303-310. 


COMPOSITION    AS    AFFECTED    BY    TIME    OF    CUTTING. 


19 


of  total  nitrogen,  a  slight  but  irregular  decrease  in  the  percentage  of 
proteid  nitrogen  in  the  dry  matter,  and  a  constant  decrease  in  the 
percentage  of  amid  nitrogen.  He  holds  that  the  amid  substances 
are  converted  into  albumen  as  the  kernels  ripen.  His  figures  are 
as  follows : 


Date. 

Weight 
•    of 
kernel 
(mg.). 

Percentage  of— 

Dry          Total       Proteid     AsJ|*ra~ 
matter,    nitrogen,  nitrogen.  nitrogen 

Amid 
nitrogen. 

Tulv  n 

9.17 
15.80 
30.79 
37.99 
46.39 
45.46 

30.14 
37.23 
45.18 
38.37 
51.52 
49.83 

2.87 
2.55 
2.65 
2.46 
2.32 
2.37 

1.90 
1.94 
2.33 
2.08 
1.98 
2.13 

0.29  1 
.20 
.19 
.16  1 
.13 
.11 

0.68 
.41 
.13 
.22 
.21 
.13 

Iiilv  is                                  

hilv  °4                                                           .   . 

Tulv  -x> 

Vugust  3                                 

\ugust  9 

Judging  from  these  results  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  per- 
centage of  nitrogen,  both  total  and  proteid,  decreases  as  the  kernel 
develops,  owing  to  the  more  rapid  deposition  of  starch  that  goes 
on  during  the  later  stages  of  growth.  The  larger  part  of  the  nitrogen 
used  by  the  wheat  plant  appears  to  be  absorbed  during  the  early 
life  of  the  plant.  This  is  transferred  in  large  amounts  to  the  kernel 
in  the  early  stages  of  its  development,  after  wrhich  nitrogen  accretion 
by  the  kernel  is  comparatively  slight.  The  deposition  of  starch, 
on  the  other  hand,  continues  actively  during  the  entire  development 
of  the  kernel.  It  would  further  appear  that  the  amid  nitrogen  is 
converted  into  proteid  compounds  as  development  proceeds. 

As  showing  the  stages  of  growth  of  the  wheat  plant  at  which  the 
greatest  absorption  of  nitrogen  occurs,  some  experiments  may  be 
quoted. 

Lawes  and  Gilbert a  say : 

In  1884  we  took  samples  of  a  growing  wheat  crop  at  different  stages  of  its  progress, 
commencing  on  June  21,  and  determind  the  dry  matter,  ash,  and  nitrogen  in  them.  Calcu- 
lation of  the  results  showed  that,  while  during  little  more  than  five  weeks  from  June  21 
there  was  comparatively  little  increase  in  the  amount  of  nitrogen  accumulated  over  a  given 
area,  more  than  half  the  total  carbon  of  the  crop  was  accumulated  during  that  period. 

Snyder's  analyses*  show  that  of  the  total  amount  of  nitrogen 
taken  up  by  the  wheat  plant,  85.97  per  cent  is  removed  from  the  soil 
within  fifty  days  after  coming  up,  88.6  per  cent  by  time  of  heading 
out,  and  95.4  per  cent  by  the  time  the  kernels  are  in  the  milk. 

Adorjanr  finds  that  assimilation  of  plant  food  from  the  soil  is  not 
proportional  to  the  formation  of  dry  matter  in  the  plant,  but  that 
it  proceeds  more  rapidly  in  the  early  stages  of  growth.  During  early 
growth  nitrogen  is  the  principal  requirement.  The  nitrogen  stored 

"  On  the  Composition  of  the  Ash  of  Wheat  Grain  and  Wheat  Straw,  London,  1884. 
''  Minnesota  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  29,  pp.  152-160. 

''Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  14,  p.  436,  from  Jour.  Landw.,  50  (1902), 
pp.  193-230. 


20  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

up  at  that  time  is,  he  says,  used  later  for  the  development  of  the 
grain. 

It  is  too  well  known  to  require  substantiation  by  experimental 
evidence  that  the  yield  of  grain  per  acre  and  the  weight  of  the  indi- 
vidual kernel  increase  as  the  grain  approaches  ripeness.  It  is  there- 
fore quite  evident  that  immaturity,  although  resulting  in  a  higher 
percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the  wheat  kernel,  would  curtail  the  pro- 
duction of  nitrogen  by  the  crop,  and,  furthermore,  that  the  produc- 
tion of  proteids  would  be  still  further  lessened  by  reason  of  the 
greater  proportion  of  amid  substances  present  in  the  grain  at  that 
time. 

INFLUENCE    OF    IMMATURE    SEED    UPON    YIELD. 

Georgeson  a  selected  kernels  from  wheat  plants  that  were  fully  ripe, 
and  from  plants  cut  w^hile  the  grain  was  in  the  milk.  He  seeded  these 
at  the  same  rate  on  2  one-tenth  acre  plots  of  land.  The  immature 
seed  yielded  at  the  rate  of  19.75  bushels  per  acre  of  grain  and  0.8  ton 
of  straw,  while  the  mature  seed  produced  22  bushels  of  grain  and 
1.04  tons  of  straw  per  acre.  Georgeson  says  that  in  a  similar  experi- 
ment the  previous  year  the  difference  in  favor  of  the  mature  seed 
was  still  more  pronounced. 

Although  the  evidence  is  limited,  it  may  safely  be  considered  that 
the  use  of  immature  seed  will  result  in  a  smaller  yield  of  wheat  than 
if  fully  ripe  seed  be  used. 

INFLUENCE    OF    CLIMATE    UPON    COMPOSITION    AND    YIELD. 

Lawes  and  Gilbert b  state  that  "high  maturation  in  the  wheat  crop 
as  indicated  by  the  proportion  of  dressed  corn  in  total  corn,  propor- 
tion of  corn  in  total  product  (grain  and  straw) ,  and  heavy  weight  of 
grain  per  bushel,  is,  other  things  being  equal,  generally  associated 
with  a  high  percentage  of  dry  substance  and  a  low  percentage  of  both 
mineral  and  nitrogenous  constituents."  This  is  based  upon  the 
wheat  crops  at  Rothamsted  for  the  years  1845  to  1854,  inclusive. 

More  recent  publications c  by  these  investigators  reaffirm  their 
belief  that  the  composition  of  the  wheat  kernel  depends  more  largely 
upon  the  conditions  that  affect  its  degree  of  development  than  upon 
any  other  factor.  They  found  almost  invariably  that  a  season  that 
favored  a  long  and  continuous  growth  of  the  plant  after  heading, 
resulting  in  a  large  yield  of  grain,  a  high  weight  per  bushel,  and  a 
plump  kernel,  produced  a  kernel  of  low  nitrogen  content. 

a  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  4,  p.  407,  from  Kansas  Experiment  Station 
Bulletin  33,  p.  50. 

b  On  Some  Points  in  the  Composition  of  Wheat  Grain,  London,  1857. 

c  Our  Climate  and  Our  Wheat  Crops,  London,  1880,  and  On  the  Composition  of  the  Ash 
of  Wheat  Grain  and  WTieat  Straw,  London,  1884. 


INFLUENCE    OF    CLIMATE    UPON    COMPOSITION    AND    YIELD.        21 

Kftrnicke  and  Werner (l  cite  an  experiment  in  which  winter  wheat 
grown  in  Poppelsdorf  for  several  years  was  sent  to  and  grown  in  the 
moist  climate  of  Great  Britain,  in  Germany,  and  in  the  continental 
climate  of  Russia  (steppes).  The  results  were  as  follows: 


Locality. 

• 

Number 
of  exper- 
iments. 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Percentage  of— 

100 
plants. 

Kernels 
from  100 
plants. 

Grain. 

Straw. 

ftreat  Britain 

37 
18 
19 

600 
500 
365 

227 
204 
160 

37.8 
40.8 
44.0 

62.3 
59.2 
56.0 

Germany                                                    

Southern  Russia                                                

These  investigators  conclude  from  the  results  that  in  a  moist  cli- 
mate relatively  more  straw  and  less  grain  are  produced  than  in  a  dry, 
warm  climate.  The  thickness  of  the  straw  and  the  weight  of  the 
kernels  from  100  heads  are  greater,  while  the  percentage  by  weight 
of  kernels  to  straw  is  much  less  in  a  moist  climate.  They  also  quote 
Haberlandt  as  saying  that  a  continental  climate  produces  a  small, 
hard  wheat  kernel,  rich  in  gluten  and  of  especially  heavy  weight, 

Deherain  and  Dupont b  report  some  interesting  observations  as  to 
the  effect  of  climate  on  the  composition  of  wheat.  They  state  that  the 
harvest  of  1888  at  Grignon  was  late  and  the  process  of  ripening  slow. 
There  was  a  heavy  yield  of  grain  having  a  gluten  content  of  12.60  per 
cent  and  a  starch  content  of  77.2  per  cent.  The  following  season  was 
dry  and  hot,  with  a  rapid  ripening  of  the  grain,  resulting  in  a  smaller 
crop.  The  gluten  content  of  the  grain  was  15.3  per  cent  and  the 
starch  content  61.9  per  cent.  They  removed  the  heads  from  a  num- 
ber of  plants.  The  next  day  the  stems  were  harvested,  as  were  also 
an  equal  number  of  entire  plants.  The  stems  without  heads  showed 
that  carbohydrates  equal  to  5.94  per  cent  of  the  dry  matter  had  been 
formed.  The  stems  on  which  the  heads  remained  one  day  longer 
contained  1.63  per  cent  carbohydrates.  They  argue  from  this  that 
the  upper  portion  of  the  stem,  provided  it  is  still  green,  performs  the 
functions  of  the  leaves  in  other  plants  and  thus  elaborates  the  starch 
that  fills  out  the  kernel  in  its  later  development. 

A  report  from  the  Ploti  Experiment  Station  •  states  that  the  con- 
ditions that  favored  an  increase  in  yield  caused  a  reduction  in  the 
relative  proportion  of  nitrogen  in  the  grain.  Excessive  humidity 
favored  the  process  of  assimilation  of  carbohydrates,  while  drought 
hastened  maturation  and  produced  a  grain  relatively  rich  in  proteids. 

«  Handbuch  des  Getreidebaues,  Berlin,  1884,  pp.  69,  70. 
&  Ann.  Agron.,  1902,  p.  522. 

'Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  14,  p.  340,  from  Sept.  Rap  An.  Sta.  Expt. 
Agron.  Ploty,  1901,  pp.  xiy-180. 


OF  THE 
I  JMlWirnoiT-\* 


22  IMPKOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

Wiley a  sent  wheat  of  the  same  origin  to  California,  Kentucky, 
Maryland,  and  Missouri.  The  original  grain  and  the  product  from 
each  State  were  analyzed.  The  results  of  one  year's  test  were 
reported.  Regarding  the  effect  of  climate,  he  says: 

There  appears  to  be  a  marked  relation  between  the  content  of  protein  matter  and  starch 
and  the  length  of  the  growing  season.  The  shorter  the  period  of  growth  and  the  cooler  the 
climate  the  larger  the  content  of  protein  and  the  smaller  the  content  of  starch,  arid  vice 
versa. 

.  Shindler,*  in  his  book  upon  this  subject,  says  (p.  75) : 

With  the  length  of  the  growing  period,  especially  with  the  length  of  the  interval  between 
bloom  and  ripeness,  varies  not  only  the  size  of  the  kernel,  but  also  the  relative  amount  of 
carbohydrates  and  protein  it  contains. 

Again,  on  page  76,  Shindler  says: 

All  this  shows  that  the  protein  constituent  of  the  kernel  depends  in  the  first  place  upon 
the  length  of  the  growing  period  and  next  upon  the  richness  of  the  soil. 

Melikov c  made  analyses  of  different  varieties  of  wheat  of  the  crops 
of  the  years  1885-1899  grown  in  southern  Russia.  The  protein 
varied  in  different  years  from  14  to  21.2  per  cent.  Melikov  concludes 
that  the  nitrogen  content  is  highest  in  dry  years  and  lowest  in  years 
of  larger  rainfall,  in  which  years  the  yield  of  wheat  per  acre  is  also 
greater. 

Gurney  and  Morris/  in  one  of  their  reports,  say: 

This  increased  gluten  [over  previous  years]  is  probably  largely  due  to  differences  in  the 
seasons,  the  weather  being  hot  and  diy  while  the  grain  was  ripening,  since  it  is  character- 
istic not  of  these  wheats  alone  but  of  most  of  the  grain  grown  in  the  colony. 

The  conclusion  to  be  inevitably  derived  from  these  observations 
is  that  climate  is  a  potent  factor  in  determining  the  yield  and  compo- 
sition of  the  wheat  crop,  and,  further,  that  its  effect  is  produced  by 
lengthening  or  shortening  the  growing  season,  particularly  that  por- 
tion of  it  during  which  the  kernel  is  developing.  A  moderately  cool 
season,  with  a  liberal  supply  of  moisture,  has  the  effect  of  prolonging 
the  period  during  which  the  kernel  is  developing,  thus  favoring  its 
filling  out  with  starch,  the  deposition  of  which  is  much  greater  at 
that  time  than  is  that  of  nitrogenous  material.  With  this  goes  an 
increase  in  volume  weight  and  an  increased  yield  of  grain  per  acre. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  hot,  dry  season  shortens  the  period  of  kernel 
development,  curtails  the  deposition  of  starch,  leaving  the  per- 

«  Yearbook  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  1901,  pp.  299-308. 

&  Der  Weizen  in  seinem  Beziehungen  zum  Klima  und  das  Gesetz  der  Korrelation,  Berlin, 
1893. 

<•  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  13  p.  451,  from  Zhur.  Opuitn.  Agron.,  1  (1900), 
pp.  256-267. 

<*  Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  12,  pt.  2,  pp.  1403-1424. 


INFLUENCE  OF  SOIL  UPON  YIELD. 


23 


centage  of  nitrogen  relatively  higher,  and  gives  a  grain  of  lighter 
weight  per  bushel  and  smaller  yield  per  acre. 

The  fact  that  one  variety  of  wheat  is  adapted  to  a  hot,  dry  climate 
and  another  to  a  cool,  moist  one  does  not  mean  that  the  former  under- 
goes as  complete  maturation  as  the  latter,  even  though  the  grain  is  not 
shriveled.  This  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  a  variety  of  wheat  well 
adapted  to  a  hot,  dry  climate  will,  when  planted  in  a  cool,  moist  one, 
immediately  grow  plumper  and  the  kernel  weight  will  increase,  as 
was  the  case  in  the  experiment  of  taking  Minnesota  wheats  to  Maine. 

INFLUENCE    OF    SOIL   UPON    COMPOSITION    AND   YIELD. 

In  considering  the  effect  of  the  soil  upon  the  wheat  crop  there  will 
naturally  be  included  experiments  designed  to  show  the  effect  of 
fertilizers  upon  the  crops.  It  is,  in  fact,  upon  experiments  with  fer- 
tilizers that  we  must  depend  for  most  of  our  information  on  this 
subject. 

Experiments  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  fertilizers  upon  the  composi- 
tion of  the  wheat  kernel  were  conducted  by  Lawes  and  Gilbert  for  a 
period  of  years  extending  from  1845  to  1854/'  Plots  of  land  in 
which  wheat  was  grown  continually  were  treated  annually  as  follows : 
Umnanured,  manured  with  ammoniacal  fertilizer  alone,  and  manured 
with  ammoniacal  fertilizer  and  proportionate  amounts  of  mineral 
salts.  In  composition  calculated  to  dry  matter,  the  wheat  on  the 
plots  receiving  ammoniacal  fertilizer  alone  contained  quite  uniformly 
a  slightly  larger  amount  of  nitrogen  than  either  of  the  other  two. 
The  averages  for  the  ten  years  were  as  follows: 


Kind  of  fertilizer,  if  any. 

Percent 

Nitrogen 
in  dry 
matter. 

age  of  — 

Ash  in 
dry 
matter. 

Weight 
of  grain 
per 
bushel 
(pounds). 

Percent- 
age of 
good 
kernels. 

Yield  per 
acre 
(pounds). 

T'nmanured  

2.13 
2.26 
2.22 

2.07 
1.85 
1.96 

58.51 
58.9 
60.2 

90.6 
90.3 
92.8 

1,045 
1,668 
1,969 

Ammonium  salts 

Minerals  and  ammonium  salts  

There  was  practically  no  difference  in  the  nitrogen  content  of  the 
straw.  From  these  experiments  the  authors  quoted  conclude  that 
there  is  no  evidence  that  the  nitrogen  content  of  the  wheat  kernel 
can  be  increased  at  pleasure  by  the  use  of  nitrogenous  manures. 

Ritthausen  and  Pott b  report  an  experiment  in  which  plots  of  land 
were  manured  (1)  with  superphosphate  alone,  (2)  with  nitrate  alone, 
(3)  with  a  mixture  of  superphosphate  and  nitrate,  and  (4)  were  left 


a  On  Some  Points  in  the  Composition  of  Wheat  Grain,  London,  1857. 
&Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  16  (1873),  pp.  384-399. 


24 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


unmanured.     There  were  three  plots  of  each.     The  following  is  a 
tabulated  statement  of  their  results: 


Kind  of  fertilizer,  if  any. 

Weight  of 
52  c.  c.  of 
kernels 
(grams). 

Yield  of 
grain  on 
plot 
(kilos). 

Percentage 
of  nitrogen 
in  dry 
matter. 

Unfertilized  

1,306 

2.60 

Superphosphate 

1,339 

2.72 

3.49 

Nitrate  

1,413 

2.30 

3.43 

Superphosphate  and  nitrate  

1,451 

2.03 

3.62 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  effect  of  the  nitrate  fertilizer  was  to 
decrease  the  yield  of  grain,  but  to  increase  the  size  of  the  kernel  and 
its  content  of  nitrogen. 

Wolff  ,a  as  early  as  1856,  in  summing  up  the  experiments  of  Hermb- 
stadt,  Muller,  and  John  with  barley,  and  of  Lawes  and  Gilbert  with 
wheat,  says : 

In  the  presence  of  a  sufficient  amount  of  phosphoric  acid  and  alkali  the  effect  of  manuring 
with  an  easily  soluble  nitrogen  compound  is  an  improvement  in  the  grain  both  in  quantity 
and  quality  [meaning  plumper  kernels].  The  kernels  decrease  in  percentage  of  nitrogen, 
but  become  plumper,  become  absolutely  and  relatively  richer  in  starch,  and  have  a  better 
appearance  and  a  higher  commercial  value.  But  when  the  nitrogenous  food  in  the  soil 
exceeds  a  certain  relation  to  the  temperature  and  rainfall  the  quality  of  the  grain  becomes 
poorer  [harder],  it  becomes  lighter  and  smaller,  takes  on  a  darker  color,  and  generally 
becomes  richer  in  percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the  air-dry  substance. 

Von  Gohren6  also  reports  results  of  experiments  in  fertilizing  wheat. 
All  experiments  were  apparently  made  in  the  same  year.  He  grew 
the  crop  on  six  different  plots  of  land,  five  of  which  were  manured  and 
each  with  a  different  fertilizer.  In  the  crop  he  distinguished  between 
large  kernels  and  small  kernels  to  show  the  quality  of  the  product. 
Determinations  of  proteids  and  starch  were  made,  and  these  were 
calculated  to  the  yield  of  each  constituent  on  each  plot. 

The  following  table  shows  the  yield  of  each  of  the  characters  deter- 
mined, and  compares  those  raised  on  the  unmanured  plot  with  those 
on  the  manured  ones  by  taking  the  former  as  one  and  reducing  the 
others  to  the  corresponding  figure : 


Yield  and  percentage. 

Unferti- 
lized. 

Ashes. 

Oil  cake. 

Bat 
guano. 

Oil  cake 
and 
ashes. 

Peruvian 
guano. 

Yield  of  grain  .                  

1.000 

1.011 

1.071 

1.  143 

1.215 

1  286 

Yield  of  large  kernels 

1.000 

.146 

1.928 

2.552 

2  226 

2  786 

Yield  of  small  kernels  

1.000 

.953 

.704 

.538 

.781 

642 

Yield  of  proteids 

1.000 

.999 

.915 

.936 

1.070 

1  114 

Yiel  1  of  starch 

1.000 

1.009 

1.081 

1.174 

1  264 

1  303 

Percentage  of  proteids  •  

14.42 

14.25 

12.70 

11.81 

12.70 

13  22 

Percentage  of  starch 

62.67 

62.56 

63.25 

64.41 

65.  24 

63  55 

The  results  show  an  increased  yield  from  the  use  of  fertilizers,  the 
production  increasing  with  the  application  of  complete  manures. 


«  Die  naturgesetzlichen  Grundlagen  des  Ackerbauer,  Leipzig,  1856,  p.  774. 
&Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  6  (1864),  pp.  15-19. 


INFLUENCE    OF    SOIL    UPON    YIELD. 


25 


The  yield  of  grain  of  good  quality  increases  in  the  same  way,  and  the 
yield  of  grain  of  poor  quality  decreases  proportionately.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  by  good  quality  of  grain  in.  these  early  writings  is 
meant  plump  kernels  and  not  necessarily  what  would  be  considered 
wheat  of  good  milling  quality  at  the  present  day.  The  production  of 
proteids  per  acre  decreased  with  the  use  of  the  incomplete  fertilizers, 
ashes  and  oil  cake,  and  even  with  the  bat  guano.  It  increased,  how- 
ever, with  the  use  of  oil  cake  and  ashes  combined  and  of  Peruvian 
guano. '  The  percentage  of  proteids  was  greatest  in  the  unfertilized 
grain  and  the  percentage  of  starch  least,  with  the  exception  of  one 
fertilized  plot. 

The  very  evident  effect  of  the  fertilizers  in  this  case  was  to  produce 
a  more  completely  matured  kernel.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  plots 
producing  grain  of  highest  starch  content  were  those  having  the 
greatest  proportion  of  plump  kernels. 

Again,  in  1884,  Lawes  and  Gilbert a  report  results  obtained  from 
manured  and  unmanured  soils.  These  experiments  cover  a  period  of 
si x t  een  years  and  are  divided  into  two  periods  of  eight  years  each.  In 
one  of  these  periods  the  seasons  were  favorable  for  wheat,  in  the  other 
unfavorable. 


Favorable  seasons. 


Unfavorable  seasons. 


Character. 

Barnyard 
manure. 

Un- 
manured. 

Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 

Barnyard 
manure. 

Un- 
manured. 

i     Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 

Weight  of  grain  per  bushel 
(pounds)  ! 

62.6 

60.5 

60.4 

57.4 

54.3 

53.7 

Percentage  of  grain  to  straw. 
Grain  per  acre  (pounds)  
Straw  per  acre  (pounds)  
Percentage  of  nitrogen  in  dry 
matter 

62.5 
2,342.0 
6,089.0 

1.73 

67.4 
i     1,156.0 
2,872.0 

1.84 

66.2 
1,967.0 
4,774.0 

2.09 

54.5 
1,967.0 
5,574.0 

1.% 

51.1 
823.0 
2,433.0 

1.98 

46.7 
1,147.0 
3,601.0 

2.25 

Percentage  of  ash  in  dry  mat- 
ter 

1.98 

1.96 

1.74 

2.06 

2.08 

1.91 

Nitrogen  per  bushel  (pounds) 

1.083 

1.  113 

1.262 

1.125 

1.075 

1.208 

It  is  evident  from  this  statement  that  the  largest  crops  and  best 
developed  kernels  were  obtained  from  the  soils  treated  with  barnyard 
manure,  and  that  these  kernels  contained  the  lowest  percentage  of 
nitrogen.  The  crops  on  unmanured  soil  stood  next  in  these  respects, 
except  in  yield.  Those  on  the  soil  receiving  ammonium  salts  pro- 
duced the  most  poorly  developed  kernels  and  those  of  highest  nitrogen 
content,  but  gave  larger  yields  than  the  unmanured  soil. 

In  the  unmanured  soil  there  was  a  very  evident  lack  of  plant  food, 
as  indicated  by  the  light  crops.  The  effect  upon  the  kernel  was  to 
c-urtail  its  development,  leaving  it  of  light  weight  and  with  a  relatively 
high  nitrogen  content. 

a  On  the  Composition  of  the  Ash  of  Wheat  Grain  and  Wheat  Straw,  London,  1884. 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


Hermbstadt  obtained  some  curious  results,  as  quoted  by  D.G.  F. 
MacDonald,a  as  follows : 

He  sowed  equal  quantities  of  wheat  upon  the  same  ground  and  manured  them  with  equal 
weights  of  the  different  manures  set  forth  below.  From  100  parts  of  each  sample  of  grain 
produced  he  obtained  starch  and  gluten  in  the  following  proportions: 


Kind  of  fertilizer,  if  any. 

Gluten. 

Starch. 

Produce. 

Unfertilized  .  ,  .               

9.2 

66.7 

Threefold. 

Potato  peels 

9  6 

65.94 

Fivefold. 

Cow  dung  

12.0 

62.3 

Sevenfold. 

Pigeon  dung.                                                                           

12.2 

63.2 

Ninefold. 

Horse  dung 

13.7 

61.64 

Tenfold. 

Goat  dung  ".  

32.9 

42.4 

Twelvefold. 

Sheep  dung                                                                                      

32.9 

42.8 

Do. 

Dried  night  soil 

33  14 

41  44 

Fourteenfold. 

Dried  ox  blood  

34.24 

41.43 

Do. 

Dried  human  urine 

31.1 

39.3 

Twelvefold. 

These  results  are  not  to  be  considered  seriously,  representing  as 
they  do  an  impossible  condition. 

Prof.  H.  A.  Huston b  treated  0.01-acre  plots  of  land  each  with 
nitrate  of  soda,  dried  blood,  sulphate  of  ammonia,  rotted  stable 
manure,  and  muck,  respectively,  either  in  the  autumn  or  spring,  or 
in  both  seasons.  In  1891  all  the  plots  treated  with  nitrogenous  com- 
pounds showed  marked  increase  in  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the 
grain.  In  1892  the  results  were  by  no  means  so  uniform  and  would 
not  justify  the  conclusion  that  nitrogenous  fertilizers  increased  the 
nitrogen  content  of  the  wheat. 

Vignon  and  Conturier^  tested  the  effect  of  phosphate  fertilizer 
alone  upon  the  nitrogen  content  of  the  grain  of  two  varieties  of  wheat. 
On  Plot  1  they  used  75  kilograms  of  phosphoric  acid  per  hectare ;  on 
Plot  2,  150  kilograms,  and  on  Plot  3,  225  kilograms. 


Variety. 


Percentage  of  nitrogen  in 
grain. 


Plot  1. 

Plot  2. 

Plot  3. 

1.83 

1.61 

1  54 

Ri6te... 

2.07 

1.98 

1.82 

There  w^as  a  very  evident  decrease  in  the  nitrogen  content  of  the 
crop  as  the  quantity  of  fertilizer  was  increased. 

It  was  concluded  from  experiments  conducted  at  the  Ploti  Experi- 
ment Station^  that,  with  favorable  meteorological  conditions,  manure 
increased  the  total  amount  of  nitrogen  taken  up  by  wheat,  but, 

«  Practical  Hints  on  Farming,  London,  1868. 
b  Indiana  Experiment  Station  Bulletins  41  and  45. 
cCompt.  Rend.,  132  (1901),  p.  791. 

<*  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  14,  p.  340,  from  Sept.  Rap.  An.  Sta.  Expt. 
Agron.  Ploty,  1901,  pp.  xiv-180. 


INFLUENCE    OF    SOIL    UPON    YIELD. 


27 


it 


although   it    thus   increased    the    total   production   of   nitrogen, 
decreased  the  relative  proportion  of  nitrogenous  substance. 

Bogdau"  conducted  investigations  the  results  of  which  indicated 
that  with  an  increase  in  the  soluble  salt  content  of  22  alkali  soils  the 
nitrogen  and  ash  contents  of  the  wheat  kernels  increased,  but  the 
absolute  weight  of  the  kernels  diminished.  These  soluble  salts  are 
rich  in  nitrates. 

Experiments  were  conducted  by  Whitson,  WeUs,  and  Vivian*  in 
which  plants  were  grown  in  pots  the  soils  of  which  were  in  some  cases 
fertilized  with  nitrates  and  in  others  with  leachings  of  single  and 
of  double  strengths  from  fertile  soils.  Field  experiments  were  con- 
ducted on  manured  and  unmanured  plots.  All  of  the  analyses, 
except  in  the  case  of  oats,  were  of  the  whole  plant.  Of  the  ripe  oat 
kernels  those  from  the  unfertilized  soil  contained  2.57  per  cent  of 
nitrogen,  while  the  average  of  those  from  the  fertilized  soil  was  2.78 
per  cent. 

Guthriec  conducted  experiments  with  fertilizers  for  wheat  during 
two  years,  in  which  he  kept  a  record  of  the  yield  and  gluten  content  of 
the  grain.  The  following  is  a  statement  of  the  results: 


Kind  of  fertilizer,  if  any. 

Experiments  in  1901— 

Experiments      in 
1902,  at  Wagga. 

At  Wagga. 

At  Bathurst. 

Yield 
per  acre 
(bush- 
els,. 

Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 

Yield 
per  acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 

Yield 
per  acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 

None  

7.7 
8.7 
13.3 
13.0 

10.0 

11.99 
10.43 
12.06 
12.02 

11.70 

13 
16 
13.5 
13.0 

13.7 

11.80 
11.21 
12.01 
11.29 

12.05 

17.6 
17.6 
22.6 
19.2 

20.3 

9.8 
8.7 
11.4 
10.0 

12.0 

\mrnonium  sulphate  

Superphosphate 

Ammonium  sulphate,  superphosphate, 
potassium  sulphate 

In  this  experiment  there  was  in  each  case  a  higher  percentage  of 
gluten  in  the  wheat  raised  on  the  fertilized  soil  than  in  that  from  the 
soil  fertilized  with  ammonium  sulphate,  and  in  the  latter  less  than  in 
the  grain  fertilized  with  other  material. 

The  most  striking  feature  of  these  results  is  their  apparent  lack  of 
uniformity.  In  some  cases  the  use  of  nitrogenous  fertilizers  was 
accompanied  by  an  increase  in  the  nitrogen  content  of  the  grain  and 
in  other  cases  no  increase  appeared;  in  some  cases  phosphoric  acid 
fertilizers  apparently  increased  the  nitrogen  content  and  in  others 
they  did  not  have  this  effect. 

Climatic  influences  have  doubtless  operated  largely  in  these  results, 
but  they  are  not  considered  by  any  of  the  experimenters  except  Wolff. 

"Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  13,  p.  329,  from  Report  of  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, St.  Petersburg,  1900. 

''Wisconsin  Experiment  Station  Report,  19  (1902),  pp.  192-209. 

« Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  13  (1902),  No.  6,  p.  664;  and  No.  7,  p.  728. 


28  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

It  is  evident  that  in  all  experiments  with  depleted  soils  the  plants  on 
the  plots  receiving  complete  fertilizers  would  take  up  larger  amounts 
of  plant  food,  including  nitrogen,  than  would  plants  on  immanured 
soils.  Any  conditions  that  would  prevent  the  normal  ripening  of  the 
crop  on  both  soils  would  therefore  leave  a  higher  percentage  of  nitro- 
gen in  the  plants  upon  the  unmanured  soil.  On  the  other  hand, 
under  conditions  which  would  permit  of  a  complete  maturation  of  the 
crop  there  might  be  no  difference  in  the  composition  of  the  grain  from 
the  manured  and  unmanured  soils.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  the 
production  of  both  nitrogen  and  starch  in  pounds  per  acre  would  be 
greater  on  the  manured  soils. 

Another  condition  that  may  affect  the  results  is  the  arrested  devel- 
opment- of  kernels  on  unmanured  soils  that  are  seriously  depleted  of 
plant  food.  Such  depletion  may  interfere  with  complete  maturation 
of  the  crop  while  the  crop  on  the  manured  soil  will  mature  fully.  In 
consequence  the  grain  on  the  unmanured  soil  will  contain  a  higher 
percentage  of  nitrogen  but  a  smaller  yield  per  acre.  The  use  of  a 
nitrogenous  manure  alone  on  exhausted  soils  may  likewise  result  in 
a  grain  of  higher  nitrogen  content. 

Expressed  in  a  more  general  way,  this  means  that  wheat  of  the 
same  variety  grown  under  the  same  climatic  conditions  will  have 
approximately  the  same  percentage  of  nitrogen  if  allowed  to  mature 
fully,  but  any  permanent  interruption  in  the  process  of  maturation 
will  result  in  a  higher  percentage  of  nitrogen,  and  in  the  latter  case  the 
percentage  of  nitrogen  will  depend  upon  the  stage  at  which  develop- 
ment was  interrupted,  and  also  upon  the  amount  of  nitrogen  accumu- 
lated by  the  plant,  that  being  greater  on  soils  manured  with  nitroge- 
nous fertilizers  alone  than  on  exhausted  soils,  and  greater  on  soils 
receiving  complete  manures  than  on  exhausted  soils  receiving  only 
nitrogenous  fertilizers,  provided  the  stage  at  which  development 
ceased  be  the  same  in  both  cases.  It  thus  happens  that  wheat  grow- 
ing on  the  soil  allowing  it  to  absorb  the  largest  amount  of  nitrogen 
will,  other  things  being  equal,  have  a  higher  nitrogen  content  if  the 
development  of  the  kernel  be  permanently  checked,  although  if  it 
were  allowed  to  mature  fully  it  would  not  have  a  greater  percentage 
of  nitrogen  than  that  grown  on  the  soil  affording  less  nitrogen. 

Reviewing  the  experiments,  wre  find  that  in  Lawes  and  Gilbert's 
first  experiment  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the  unmanured  soil  was 
less  than  on  the  soil  receiving  only  nitrogenous  fertilizer,  and  that  the 
weight  of  grain  per  bushel  and  the  percentage  of  good  kernels  on  the 
two  plots  were  practically  the  same.  It  would  not  appear,  therefore, 
that  the  wheat  on  the  plot  receiving  the  nitrogenous  fertilizer  was  less 
well  matured  than  that  on  the  unmanured  plot.  In  this  case  there 
appears  to  be  a  slight  increase  in  the  percentage  of  nitrogen,  due 
entirely  to  the  use  of  nitrogenous  fertilizers.  Comparing  the  grain  on 


INFLUENCE    OF    SOIL    MOISTURE    UPON    YIELD. 


29 


the  plot  receiving  only  nitrogenous  fertilizer  with  that  receiving  the 
complete  fertilizer  it  will  be  seen  that  the  former  has  a  higher  percent- 
age of  nitrogen,  but  this  is  evidently  due  to  the  poorly  developed  ker- 
nels which  weigh  less  per  bushel  than  the  grain  on  the  completely 
fertilized  plot. 

Von  Gohren's  results  show  plainly  that  the  kernels  on  the  manured 
land  developed  better  than  on  the  unmanured,  and  with  this  better 
development  there  was  an  increase  in  the  percentage  of  starch  and  a 
decrease  in  the  nitrogen. 

In  Lawes  and  Gilbert's  second  experiment  the  percentage  of  nitro- 
gen in  the  wheat  on  the  soil  manured  with  ammonium  salts  was  less 
than  that  in  the  wheat  on  the  unmanured  soil,  but  the  weight  of  grain 
per  bushel  shows  that  the  higher- nitrogen  content  was  due,  in  part  at 
least,  to  incomplete  maturation.  The  higher  percentage  of  nitrogen 
in  the  wheat  on  the  soil  receiving  only  nitrogenous  manures  as  com- 
pared with  that  receiving  complete  manures  can  be  traced  to  the  same 
condition  of  the  grain. 

INFLUENCE    OF    SOIL    MOISTURE    UPON    COMPOSITION    AND    YIELD. 

Experiments  were  conducted  by  D.  Prianishinkov a  in  w^hich  wheat 
was  raised  with  different  degrees  of  moisture,  but  in  the  same  soil  and 
under  the  same  conditions  of  light  and  temperature.  With  a  larger 
amount  of  moisture  in  the  soil  there  was  a  lower  nitrogen  content  in 
the  grain.  It  was  also  stated  that  the  duration  of  the  period  of  vege- 
tation was  somewhat  shorter  when  the  moisture  supply  was  greater. 

Traphagen6  reports  marked  changes  in  the  composition  of  wheat 
grown  with  and  without  irrigation  at  the  Montana  Experiment 
Station.  A  wheat  grown  under  irrigation  on  the  station  farm  was 
planted  the  following  year  on  land  not  irrigated.  Presumably  the 
land  was  of  similar  character.  The  two  crops  of  grain  were  analyzed 
and  the  percentages  stated  below  were  found. 


Crop. 

Mois- 
ture. 

Crude 
protein. 

Ether 
extract. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Crude 
fiber. 

Ash. 

I  rrigated  wheat  

Perct. 

7.87 

Perct. 

8.81 

Perct. 
1.93 

Per  ct. 
76.99 

Per  ct. 
2.60 

Perct. 
1.80 

t~n  irrigated  wheat. 

7.65 

14.41 

2.23 

71.33 

2.65 

1.70 

No  records  of  yields  or  of  weights  of  kernels  are  given,  but  it  is  fair 
to  suppose  that  the  unirrigated  wheat  possessed  the  light,  shrunken 
kernel  which  is  characteristic  of  wheat  raised  without  sufficient 
moisture. 

"  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  13,  p.  631,  from  Zhur.  Gpuitn.  Agron.,  1  (1900), 
No.  1,  pp.  13-20. 
^Montana  Experiment  Station  Report  (1902),  pp.  59-60. 


30 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


Irrigation  experiments  were  conducted  by  Widtsoe  a  in  which  wheat 
of  the  same  variety  was  raised  on  plots  of  land  each  one  of  which 
received  a  different  quantity  of  water.  A  record  was  kept  of  the 
yield  and  composition  of  the  grain  on  each  plot. 


\\T  c\  +/vr» 

Yield 

PPTVPTI  ta  e-P  of                Yield  <  in  Pounds) 

per  acre  of— 

Plot. 

w  &  t6r 
applied 
(inches)  . 

per  acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Protein 
in  grain. 

Ash  in 
grain. 

Nitrogen. 

Ash. 

317 

4.63 

4.50 

24.8 

2.50 

10.7 

6.75 

319 

5.14 

3.83 

23.2 

3.07 

8.5 

7.05 

320 

8.73 

10.33 

19.9 

2.54 

19.7 

15.74 

318 

8.89 

11.33 

19.4 

2.93 

21.1 

19.72 

321 

10.30 

14.66 

18.4 

2.34 

25.9 

20.24 

325 

12.09 

11.16 

21.3 

3.25 

22.8 

21.44 

322 

12.18 

11.66 

23.1 

2.88 

25.8 

20.30 

326 

12.80 

13.00 

17.1 

2.52 

21.3 

21.50 

327 

17.50           15.33 

17.2 

2.57 

25.3 

23.64 

328 

21.11    |      17.33 

15.9 

2.34 

26.4 

24.33 

329 

30.00           26.66 

14.0 

4.14 

35.8 

66.20 

330 

40.00           14.50             17.1 

2.52 

23.8 

21.92 

The  results  show  that  with  an  increase  in  the  water  used  for  irriga- 
tion up  to  30  inches  there  were  in  general  an  increase  in  the  yield  of 
grain  and  a  decrease  in  the  nitrogen  content.  No  volume  weights 
or  other  means  of  judging  of  the  development  of  the  kernels  on  the 
different  plots  are  given,  but  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
grain  on  the  plots  receiving  small  quantities  of  water  was  not  poorly 
developed.  The  column  added  showing  the  yield  of  nitrogen  in 
pounds  per  acre  indicates  a  lack  of  nutriment  in  the  grain  on  these 
plots.6 

High  nitrogen  content  arising  from  a  small  supply  of  soil  moisture 
is  sometimes  due  to  a  restricted  development  of  the  kernel.  There 
is  nothing  in  these  results  to  indicate  a  greater  absorption  of  nitrogen 
by  the  crop  on  soil  having  less  moisture,  but  results  of  this  nature 
are  cited  elsewhere  in  this  bulletin. 


INFLUENCE   OF   SIZE   OR   WEIGHT   OF   THE    SEED-WHEAT   KERNEL  UPON 

THE    CROP    YIELD. 

Sanborn c  reports  experiments  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  separating 
seed  wheat  into  kernels  of  different  grades  to  ascertain  the  effect  upon 
the  yield.  He  divided  the  kernels  into  large,  medium,  small,  ordinary 
(grain  as  it  came  from  the  thrasher),  and  shriveled,  and  continued 
the  experiments  for  four  years.  Apparently  the  large  kernels  were 
separated  from  the  crop  grown  from  large  seed  the  previous  year,  and 

a  Utah  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  80. 

&  Nitrogen  has  been  calculated  from  proteids  by  dividing  by  6.25. 

c  Utah  Experiment  Station  Report,  1893,  p.  168. 


INFLUENCE    OF    SIZE    OR    WEIGHT    OF    SEED    KERNEL. 


31 


so  with  the  other  classes  of  kernels.     He  tabulates  his  results  as 
follows : 


Kind  of  seed. 

Yield  of  grain  on  plots  (in 
pounds)  . 

Average 
for  4 
years. 

1890. 

1891. 

1892. 

1893. 

Bushels 
per  acre. 

Large                                                                   .  . 

88.  5 

72.5 
70.0 
105.0 
95.0 
43.0 

Ill 

87 
64 
87 
78 

63.0 
67.0 
74.0 
29.5 
31.0 

18.72 
16.60 
18.72 
16.42 
11.2& 

Small                                      

94.6 
84.0 

Ordinary 

shriveled 

The  relation  between  yields  of  the  crops  representing  different 
sized  kernels  is  so  irregular  from  year  to  year  that  suspicion  is 
aroused  regarding  the  accuracy  of  the  results,  due  to  lack  of  uni- 
formity in  soil.  Sanborn's  conclusion  is  that  very  little,  if  any, 
advantage  is  to  be  gained  by  separating  seed  wheat  and  planting 
the  large  kernels. 

At  the  Indiana  Experiment  Station,  Lattart  conducted  experi- 
ments in  which  wheat  was  separated  by  means  of  a  fanning  mill  into 
heavy  and  light  kernels,  but  impurities  and  chaffy  seed  were  fanned 
out  of  each  lot  of  wheat.  The  experiments  were  continued  three 
years,  but  the  separations  were  made  each  year  from  seed  that  had 
not  been  so  separated  the  year  before.  The  average  gain  from  the 
large  seed  for  three  years  was  2.5  bushels  per  acre. 

Georgeson,*  at  the  Kansas  station,  seeded  plots  of  land  with  (1) 
light  seed  weighing  56  pounds  per  bushel,  (2)  common  seed  weighing 
62.5  pounds,  (3)  heavy  seed  weighing  63  pounds,  and  (4)  selected 
seed,  obtained  by  picking  the  largest  and  finest  heads  in  the  field  just 
before  the  crop  was  cut,  weighing  61.5  pounds  per  bushel.  Seed  was 
separated  each  year  from  wheat  not  grown  from  previously  selected 
seed.  The  average  results  for  three  years  were  as  follows: 


Grade  of  seed. 

Yield  of 
grain 
per  acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Grade  of  seed. 

Yield  of 
grain 
per  acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Light 

25.19 

Heavy 

27.07 

Common 

26  57 

Select  (average  for  2  years) 

25.82 

Desprez0  reports  experiments  extending  through  three  years  in 
which  large  kernels  were  selected  from  a  crop  grown  from  large  seed 

«  Indiana  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  36,  pp.  110-128. 
ft  Kansas  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  40,  pp.  51-62. 

<•  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  7,  p.  679,  from  Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  59  (1895),  2,. 
pp.  694-698. 


32  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

for  several  years  and  small  seed  from  a  crop  grown  from  small  seed 
for  several  years.  Five  varieties  of  wheat  were  used.  The  average 
results  for  three  years  were  a  difference  of  1,067  to  1,828  kilograms 
of  grain  per  hectare  in  favor  of  the  large  seed,  but  the  difference  was 
in  general  greater  the  first  year  than  later.  The  use  of  large  seed 
gave  a  crop  with  kernels  larger  than  those  grown  from  small  seed. 

Middle  ton a  reports  the  yields  obtained  from  large  wheat  kernels 
to  be  almost  double  those  obtained  from  small  seed  kernels. 

Bolley, b  as  the  results  of  experiments  continuing  for  four  years  in 
which  plump  kernels  of  large  size  and  plump  kernels  of  small  size 
were  selected  for  seed,  concludes  that  "  perfect  grains  of  large  size 
and  greatest  weight  produce  better  plants  than  perfect  grains  of 
small  size  and  light  weight,  even  when  the  grains  come  from  the  same 
head." 

At  the  Ontario  Agricultural  College,  Zavitzr  selected  large  plump 
seed,  small  plump  seed,  and  shrunken  seed  of  both  spring  and  winter 
wheat.  Experiments  were  continued  for  eight  years  with  spring 
wheat  and  five  years  with  winter  wheat,  the  selections  each  year 
being  from  a  crop  grown  from  previously  unselected  seed.  His 
results  are  as  follows: 


Kind  of  seed. 

Yield  per  acre  (in 
bushels). 

Spring 
wheat. 

Winter 
wheat. 

Large,  plump  .                      .                    

21.7 
18.0 
16.7 

42.4 
34.8 
33.7 

Small,  plump 

Shrunken  

Deherain  and  Dupont d  report  that  the  yields  from  small  and  large 
kernels  of  a  number  of  varieties  of  wheat  were  in  all  cases  in  favor  of 
the  large  kernels,  but  a  large  difference  in  yield  was  obtained  only 
when  there  was  a  marked  difference  in  the  weight  of  the  kernels. 

Soule  and  Vanatter*  conducted  experiments  for  three  years  in 
which  large  and  small  kernels  were  separated  by  means  of  sieves. 
In  addition  a  plot  of  unselected  seed  was  planted.  The  large  seed 
was,  each  year  after  the  first,  selected  from  the  crop  grown  from 
large  seed  the  previous  year.  The  same  was  true  of  the  small  seed. 
These  investigators  say: 

a  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  12,  p.  441,  from  Univ.  Coll.  of  Wales  Kept., 
1899,  pp.  68-70. 

&  North  Dakota  Experiment  Station  Report,  1901,  p.  30. 

c  Ontario  Agricultural  College  and  Experiment  Farm  Report,  1901,  p.  84. 

tf  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  15,  p.  672,  from  Compt.  Rend.,  135  (1902), 
p.  654. 

e  Tennessee  Experiment  Station  Bulletin,  vol.  16,  No.  4,  p.  77. 


INFLUENCE    OF    SIZE    OR    WEIGHT    OF    SEED    KERNEL.  33 

The  average  difference  in  yield  at  the  end  of  three  years  between  large  grains  (607  per 
ounce),  commercial  sample  (689  per  ounce),  and  small  grains  (882  per  ounce),  with  Med- 
iterranean wheat,  was  2.06  bushels  in  favor  of  large  grains  as  compared  with  the  commercial 
sample,  and  5.18  bushels  in  favor  of  large  grains  over  small  grains.  The  difference  in  yield 
Ix'tutTM  the  large  grains  and  the  commercial  sample  chiefly  occurred  the  first  year;  but  it 
i-  |><t-.-.il>!e.  though  hardly  probable,  that  the  difference  was  partly  due  to  variation  in  the 
soil.  The  experiment  has  been  carried  on  in  different  parts  of  the  field  for  the  last  two 
years,  and  the  difference  in  yield  is  now  only  0.32  bushel  per  acre  in  favor  of  the  large  grains. 

Cobb"  reports  tests  of  various  grades  of  wheat  kernels  with  respect 
to  size,  and  concludes  that  large  kernels  give  better  yields  of  grain. 
The  seed  of  one  year  was  not  the  product  of  the  corresponding  grade 
of  the  previous  one. 

GrenfelP  selected  plump  and  shriveled  kernels  from  the  same  bulk 
of  grain.  Of  these  150  kernels  were  sown  in  each  row,  with  rows  of 
plump  and  shriveled  kernels  alternating.  The  germination  in  both 
rows  appeared  much  alike,  but  the  plants  in  the  rows  sown  froin 
plump  grain  soon  began  to  gain  on  the  others  and  kept  ahead  for  the 
remainder  of  the  season.  The  tillering  was  better  in  the  plump- 
grain  plants.  Grenfell  tabulates  his  results  thus: 


Variety. 

Percentage 
Kind.                   of  plants 
that  grew. 

Number 
of  heads. 

Tillering 
power. 

Average 
yield  per 
acre 
(bush- 
els). 

Stein  wedel 

Plump                                        96.0 

179 

1.24 

10.9 

Do  

Shriveled  89.3 

174 

1.29 

9.9 

Purple  Straw 

.do     ..                 .                 89.3 

153 

1.14 

6.1 

Do 

Plump                                        90.0 

200 

1  49 

10 

Do  
Do 

Shriveled  76.0 
Plump                                          92.  0 

140 
161 

1.16 
1.23 

6.9 
8  4 

Do  ...                    

Shriveled  98.  0 

155 

1.34 

7.2 

Plump-kernel  averages  

92.7 

180 

1.32 

9.8 

Shriveled-kernel  averages  .... 

;  88.5 

155 

1.23 

7.5 

As  bearing  upon  this  subject  some  experiments  conducted  by 
Riinkerr  are  of  interest.  He  weighed  each  of  the  kernels  of  a  large 
number  of  heads  of  wheat  of  the  Spalding  Prolific  and  Martin  Amber 
varieties,  and  found  that  the.  heaviest  kernels  occur  in  the  lower  half 
of  the  spike.  With  spikes  of  different  lengths  and  weights,  the 
weight  of  the  average  kernel  increases  with  the  size  of  the  spike. 

Weights  of  individual  kernels  from  the  same  spikes  show  that 
there  is  a  great  range  in  this  respect.  One  spike,  of  which  R tinker 
gives  the  weights  of  all  the  kernels,  and  which  is  given  as  representa- 
tive of  the  average,  shows  kernels  varying  in  weight  from  36  to  71 
milligrams. 

Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  14  (1903),  No.  2,  pp.  145-169. 
&  Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  12  (1901 ),  No.  9,  pp.  1053-1062. 
<*  Jour.  f.  Landw.,  38  (1890),  p.  309. 

27889— No.  78—05 3 


34  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

It  is  therefore  quite  evident  that  a  sample  of  wheat  taken  from 
spikes  of  different  sizes  when  separated  into  lots  of  light  and  heavy 
kernels  would  have  both  the  larger  spikes  and  smaller  spikes  repre- 
sented in  each  lot  of  kernels,  but  doubtless  the  proportion  of  kernels 
from  large  heads  would  be  greater  in  the  lot  of  heavy  kernels. 

It  would  appear  from  these  results  that  the  evidence  was  over- 
whelmingly in  favor  of  large  or  heavy  wheat  kernels  for  seed.  Most 
of  the  experimenters  selected  seed  of  different  kinds  each  year  without 
reference  to  previous  selection.  If  large  seed  or  small  seed  represent 
plants  of  different  characteristics  and  if  these  properties  are  hered- 
itary, the  results  of  selection  of  large  or  small  seeds  for  several 
years  may  be  quite  different  from  what  they  would  be  the  first  year. 
It  is  only  those  experiments  in  which  selection  of  the  same  kind  of 
seed  has  been  continued  for  several  generations  that  may  be  relied 
upon  to  indicate  the  value  of  continuous  selection  of  large  kernels 
for  seed. 

Such  experiments . have  been  conducted  by  Sanborn,  by  Desprez, 
and  by  Soule  and  Vanatter.  The  work  of  Desprez  indicates  that  the 
size  of  the  kernel  is  a  hereditary  quality.  That  being  the  case,  it  is 
evident  that  the  small  seed  of  the  first  separation  may  be  composed 
partly  of  seed  that  is  small  on  account  of  immaturity  and  partly  of 
seed  that  is  small  by  inheritance,  but  which  is  perfectly  normal. 
When  such  seed  is  planted  the  immature  seed  will  be  largely  elimi- 
nated in  the  crop,  but  the  naturally  small  seed  will  have  reproduced 
itself  and  will  compose  most  of  the  crop.  When  the  seed  is  again 
separated  a  much  smaller  percentage  of  small  seed  will  be  immature, 
and  in  consequence  a  larger  number  of  kernels  will  produce  plants. 
It  would  appear  from  Desprez's  experiments,  however,  that  those 
plants  producing  small  kernels  are  not  so  prolific  as  those  producing 
large  kernels. 

Sanborn's  results  make  a  Very  good  showing  for  the  small  kernels, 
but,  as  before  stated,  the  extreme  irregularity  would  lead  to  the 
belief  that  the  soil  on  the  plots  lacked  uniformity,  or  that  some  other 
errors  had  influenced  the  results.  To  offset  this  the  tests  cover  a 
period  of  four  years,  which  should  help  to  rectify  mistakes,  and  in 
consequence  the  good  showing  made  by  the  small  kernels  is  entitled 
to  some  consideration. 

Soule  and  Vanatter's  results  fulfill  exactly  the  conditions  of  the 
hypothesis  that  the  small  seed  would  the  first  year  contain  a  much 
larger  proportion  of  immature  kernels  than  it  would  in  subsequent 
years,  and  hence  yield  more  poorly  the  first  year.  Their  results  with 
heavy  kernels  as  compared  with  ordinary  seed  offer  little  encourage- 
ment to  the  continuous  selection  of  large  kernels. 


RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    KERNEL    TO    NITROGEN    CONTENT.       35 

The  fact  before  referred  to  that  both  large  and  small  kernels  are 
found  on  the  same  head  of  wheat  is  perhaps  an  argument  against  the 
superior  value  of  large  seed.  If  the  plant  and  not  the  seed  is  the  unit 
of  reproduction,  small  seed  from  a  plant  whose  kernels  averaged 
large  size  may  be  better  than  large  seed  from  a  plant  whose  kernels 
averaged  small  size. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  majority  of  the 
kernels  in  the  lot  of  heavy  kernels  would  be  from  plants  having  large 
spikes,  and  vice  versa.  This  would  give  the  kernels  in  the  heavy  lot 
some  advantage.  Again,  the  advantage  that  the  large  kernel  is  sup- 
posed to  possess  for  seed  may  not  be  in  producing  a  large  kernel  in 
the  resulting  crop,  but  in  giving  the  plant  a  better  start  in  life,  or 
producing  a  more  vigorous  plant. 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    KERNEL    TO    NITROGEN    CONTENT. 

Richardson"  has  made  a  large  number  of  analyses  of  wheats  from 
different  parts  of  the  United  States.  The  weight  of  100  kernels  was 
also  determined  in  each  sample.  There  can  not  be  said  to  be  any 
constant  relation  between  the  nitrogen  content  and  the  kernel  weight, 
but  in  the  main  the  large  kernels  have  a  lower  percentage  of  nitrogen 
than  the  small  kernels,  and  inversely. 

Pagnoul*  reports  that  in  a  test  of  eleven  varieties  of  wheat  there 
was  in  the  main  a  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the  crop 
a<  compared  with  the  seed  when  there  was  an  increase  in  the  weight 
of  1,000  kernels  in  the  crop  as  compared  with  the  seed. 

The  same  investigator"  again  states  that  in  an  examination  of 
seventy  varieties  of  wheat  there  was  no  constant  relation  between 
the  size  of  the  kernels  and  their  nitrogen  content,  but  that  in  general 
the  varieties  with  small  kernels  were  the  varieties  richest  in  nitrogen. 

Marek*  separated  wheat  of  the  same  variety  into  lots  of  large  and 
of  small  kernels.  He  found  on  analysis  that  the  large  kernels  con- 
tained 12.52  per  cent  protein  and  the  small  kernels  13.55  per  cent 
protein. 

Woods  and  Merrill '  made  analyses  of  a  number  of  wheats  grown 
in  Minnesota  and  of  the  same  varieties  grown  in  Maine.  The  wheats 
uniformly  developed  a  larger  kernel  when  grown  in  Maine.  Grouping 
five  varieties  raised  in  Minnesota  and  five  raised  in  Maine,  it  will  be 
seen  that  with  this  increase  in  the  size  of  the  kernel  there  was  a 

"  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  Division  of  Chemistry,  Bulletins  1  and  3. 
''  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1893,  p.  616,  from  Ann.  Agron.,  1892,  p.  486. 
c  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1888,  p.  767,  from  Ann.  Agron.,  14,  pp.  262-272. 
'Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1876,  from  Landw.  Zeitung  f.  Westfalen  u.  Lippe, 
I  875,  p.  362. 

•  Maine  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  97. 


86  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

decrease  in  the  nitrogen  content.     The  analyses,  reduced  to  a  water- 
free  basis,  are  as  follows : 


Where  grown. 

Weight  of 
100  kernels 
(grams). 

Percentage 
of  protein. 

Minnesota 

2.239 

16.22 

Maine  

3.109 

15.43 

In  a  review  of  the  experiments  concerning  the  relation  of  weight 
to  composition  of  cereals,  Gwallig"  says  that  the  results  obtained 
by  Marek,  Wollny,  Marcker,  Hoffmeister,  and  Nothwang  divide 
barley  and  rye  into  one  group,  and  wheat  and  oats  into  another,  as 
regards  this  relation.  With  barley  and  rye,  the  largest,  heaviest 
kernels  are  the  richest  in  protein.  With  wheat  and  oats,  the  smallest, 
lightest  kernels  have  the  highest  protein  content. 

Gwallig  says  further  that  with  an  increased  protein  content  there 
is  a  decrease  in  nitrogen-free  extract.  The  fat  and  ash  do  not  stand 
in  a  definite  relation  to  the  kernel  weight,  but  the  small,  light  kernels 
have  a  higher  percentage  of  crude  fiber,  which  circumstance  is 
accounted  for  by  the  larger  surface  possessed  by  the  smaller  kernels. 

Snyder6  has  divided  small  kernels  into  two  classes — those  which 
are  small  because  shrunken  and  those  which  are  small  although  well 
filled.  He  finds  that  as  between  small  kernels  of  the  first  class  and 
large,  w^ell-nlled  kernels,  the  former  contain  a  higher  percentage  of 
nitrogen,  but  as  between  the  small,  well-filled  and  the  large,  well-filled 
kernels,  the  latter  contain  the  higher  percentage  of  nitrogen.  In 
testing  this  he  used  large  and  small  kernels  of  the  same  variety  in 
each  case,  and  the  wheats  represented  a  large  portion  of  tlie  wheat- 
growing  area  of  the  United  States.  As  regards  the  relation  of  large, 
perfect,  and  small,  perfect  kernels  there  were  twenty-four  out  of 
twenty-seven  cases  in  which  the  large  kernels  contained  a  greater 
percentage  of  nitrogen. 

Johannsen  and  Weis/  in%experiments  with  five  .varieties  of  wheat, 
find  that  as  a  general  rule  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  is  increased 
with  increasing  grain  weight,  but  that  there  are  many  exceptions 
to  the  rule. 

Cobb'-  states  that  small  wheat  kernels  contain  a  larger  proportion 
of  gluten  than  do  large  ones,  but  he  does  not  submit  any  analyses  to 
substantiate  his  statement. 

"Abstract  in  Cent-rib,  f.  Agr.  Chein.,  24  (1895),  p.  388,  from  Landw.  Jahrbiicher,  23 
(1804),  p.  835. 

f>  Minnesota  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  85. 

''Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  12,  p.  327,  from  Tidsskr.  Landbr.  Planteavl.,  5 
(1899),  pp.  91-100. 

rf  Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  5  (1894),  No.  4,  pp.  239-250. 
. 


INFLTKNCK    <>F    SPECIFIC    GRAVITY    OF    SEED    KERNEL. 


37 


Ki'rnicko  and  Werner"  quote  the  experiments  of  Reiset  to  show 
that  shriveled  kernels  have  a  higher  nitrogen  content  than  plump 
ones.  With  different  varieties  of  wheat  he  found  the  following: 


Variety. 

.Kind. 

Percent- 
age  cf 
nitrcgen 

in  drv 
matter. 

Shriveled 

2.48 

Plump... 

2.33 

Shriveled  

2.44 



Plump 

2.08 



Shriveled  

2.59 

Do                                                                                                

Plump     

2.35 

Carleton*  records  the  weight  of  100  kernels  and  the  percentage  of 
'  •  albuminoids ' '  in  sixty-one  samples  of  wheat  from  various  parts  of 
the  world.  Dividing  these  into  classes  according  to  the  weight  of 
100  kernels  we  have  the  following: 


Weight  of 
100  kernels 
(grams). 

Average 
weight  of 
kernels 
(grams). 

Percent- 
age of  albu- 
minoids. 

Number 
of  sam- 
ples. 

2  to  3 
3  to  4 
over  4 

2.66 
3.67 

4.57 

14.58 
12.31 
11.62 

8 

25 
30 

Reviewing  these  experiments  there  would  seem  to  be  no  doubt 
that  shrunken  kernels  contain  a  higher  percentage  of  nitrogen  than 
do  well-filled  ones,  but  as  between  large  and  small  kernels,  both  of 
which  are  well  filled,  there  is  not  a  great  deal  of  information.  Snyder's 
experiments  are  the  only  ones  that  cover  this  ground,  but  they  are 
extensive  and  very  uniform,  and  may  be  considered  as  deciding  the 
question  in  favor  of  a  higher  nitrogen  content  for  the  large  kernels, 
so  far  as  small,  plump  kernels  and  large,  plump  kernels  are  concerned. 
But,  as  small  and  light  kernels  are  usually  not  plump,  taking  the 
crop  as  a  whole  and  dividing  it  equally  into  large  and  small  or 
heavy  and  light  kernels,  the  evidence  would  be  in  favor  of  the  small 
or  light  kernels  for  high  nitrogen  content.  As  between  wheats  from 
different  regions  and  of  different  varieties,  those  having  small  kernels 
are  generally  of  higher  nitrogen  content. 

IXFLIK.M  K    OF    THE    SPECIFIC    GRAVITY    OF    THE    SEED    KERNEL    UPON 

YIELD. 

Sanborn^  separated  seed  wheat  with  a  sieve  into  large,  medium, 
small,  and  shriveled  kernels.  The  large  seed  was  separated  by  means 

"Handbuch  des  Getreidebaues,  1,  pp.  52Q-521,  Berlin,  1884. 

6U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  Division  of  Vegetable  Physiology  and  Pathology, 
Bulletin  24. 

<*  Abstract,  Experiment  Station  Record,  5,  p.  58,  from  Utah  Experiment  Station  Report, 
1892,  pp.  133-135. 


38  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

of  a  brine  solution  into  two  nearly  equal  parts.  The  seed  thus  sepa- 
rated was  planted  on  separate  plots.  The  experiment  was  con- 
tinued three  years.  The  heavy  seed  yielded  10.8  bushels  and  the 
light  16.3  bushels  per  acre.  Unselected  seed  yielded  16.4  bushels 
per  acre. 

Seed  wheat  of  four  varieties  was  separated  by  Church a  by  means 
of  solutions  of  calcium  chlorid  having  specific  gravities  of  1.247, 
1.293,  and  1.31.  The  seed  was  first  treated  with  a  solution  of  mer- 
curic chlorid  to  remove  adherent  air.  Each  lot  of  seed  was  planted 
separately.  From  the  results  the  following  conclusions  are  drawn: 

(1)  The  seed  wheat  of  the  greatest  density  produced  the  densest 
seed. 

(2)  The  seed  wheat  of  the  greatest  density  yielded  the  largest 
amount  of  dressed  grain. 

(3)  The  seed  of  medium  density  generally  gave  the  largest  number 
of  ears,  but  the  ears  were  poorer  than  those  from  the  densest  seed. 

(4)  Seed  of  medium  density  generally  produced  the  largest  number 
of  fruiting  plants. 

(5)  The  seed  wheat  that  sank  in  water,  but  floated  in  a  solution 
having  the  density  1.247,  was  of  very  low  value,  yielding  on  an 
average  only  34.4  pounds  of  dressed  grain  for  every  100  yielded  by 
the  densest  seed. 

Haberlandt,ft  as  the  result  of  experiments  with  several  cereals,  has 
shown  that  the  comparative  weight  of  kernels  is  transmitted  to  the 
grain  resulting  from  this  seed.  This  was  the  case  with  wheat,  rye, 
barley,  and  oats.  The  results  with  wheat  were  as  follows: 


Number  of  pounds. 

Weight  of  kernels. 

Light. 

Medium. 

Heavy. 

1  000  seed  kernels                

Grams. 
29.5 
34.3 

Grams. 
31.2 
35.5 

Grams. 
33.0 
36.3 

1  000  crop  kernels                                    

Wollnyc  objects  to  the  results  of  the  experiments  by  F.  Haberlandt, 
Church,  Trommer,  Hellriegel,  and  Ph.  Dietrich  with  various  cereals, 
in  which  almost  without  exception  the  kernels  of  high  specific  gravity 
produced  the  best  yields,  because  no  distinction  was  made  between 
absolute  weight  and  specific  gravity  in  the  kernels.  He  claims  that 
the  value  of  the  seed  lies  in  the  kernels  of  absolutely  heavy  weight 
rather  than  in  the  kernels  of  high  specific  gravity.  He  concludes 
that  the  specific  gravity  of  the  seed  exerts  no  influence  on  the  yield 
of  the  crop. 

«  Science  with  Practice. 
.&  Jahresb.  Agr.  Chem.,  1866-67,  p.  298. 

^  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1887,  p.  169,  from  Forschungen  a.  d.  Gebiete  Agri- 
kulturphysik,  9  (1886),  pp.  207-216. 


SPECIFIC    GRAVITY    AND    NITROGEN    CONTENT.  39 

In  the  light  of  the  experiments  that  have  been  conducted  with 
seed  wheat  of  high  and  low  specific  gravities,  it  would  appear  that, 
in  general,  seed  of  very  low  specific  gravity  does  not  yield  well,  and 
it  is  evident  that  such  seed  must  be  deficient  in  mineral  matter  and 
is  probably  not  normal  in  other  respects.  There  would  not  appear, 
however,  to  be  any  marked  difference  in  the  productive  capacity  of 
kernels  of  medium  specific  gravity  and  kernels  of  great  specific 
gravity. 

RELATION   OF   SPECIFIC   GRAVITY   OF   KERNEL  TO   NITROGEN    CONTENT. 

Murek"  found  that  with  an  increase  in  the  specific  gravity  of  the 
kernel  there  was  a  decrease  in  nitrogen  content. 

Pagnoul,6  in  testing  seventy  varieties  of  wheat,  found  that  the 
nitrogen  content  rose  with  the  specific  gravity,  but  not  regularly, 
and  that  a  definite  relation  could  not  be  traced. 

Wollny0  took  kernels  of  horny  structure  and  kernels  of  mealy 
structure.  He  says  it  is  generally  recognized  that  the  hard,  horny 
kernels  have  a  higher  specific  gravity,  and  that  it  is  commonly 
attributed  to  their  higher  content  of  proteids.  He  contends  that  as 
starch  has  a  higher  specific  gravity  than  protein  the  mealy  kernels 
must  really  have  a  higher  specific  gravity  than  the  horny  ones. 

Kornicke  and  Werner''  state  the  specific  gravities  of  the  various 
chemical  constituents  of  the  wheat  kernel  as  follows:  Starch,  1.53; 
sugar,  1.60;  cellulose,  1.53;  fats,  0.91  to  0.96;  gluten,  1.297;  ash, 
2.50;  water,  1.00;  air,  0.001293.  They  state  also  (p.  121)  that  the 
specific  gravity  of  the  kernel  does  not  stand  in  any  relation  to  the 
volume  weight,  for  the  factor  which  results  from  weighing  a  certain 
volume  mass  is  influenced  by  the  air  spaces  between  the  kernels,  and 
these  depend  upon  the  form  and  size  as  well  as  the  surface  and  acci- 
dental structure  of  the  kernel.  They  also  contend  that  there  is  no 
relation  between  the  volume  weight  and  the  content  of  proteid 
material. 

Schindler*  shows  that  by  tabulating  a  large  number  of  varieties 
of  wheat  from  different  parts  of  the  world,  and  representing  different 
varieties,  there  is  no  relation  between  the  weight  of  1,000  kernels 
and  the  volume  weight  of  100  c.  c.  By  separating  these  into  varieties,, 
even  when  grown  in  different  localities,  kernels  of  the  same  variety 
did  show  a  definite  and  constant  relation.  The  volume  weight 
increased  with  an  increase  in  the  wreight  of  1,000  kernels. 

«  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1876,  p.  46,  from  Landw.  Zeitung  f.  Westfalen  u. 
Lippe,  1875,  p.  362. 

'  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr. Chem.,  1888,  p.  767,  from  Ann.  Agron.,  14,  ppr262-272. 

f  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1887,  p.  169,  from  Forschungen  a.  d.  Gebiete  Agri- 
kulturphysik,  9  (1886),  pp.  207-216. 

11  Handbuch  des  Getreidebaues,  2,  p.  120,  Berlin,  1884. 

'  Jour.  Landw.,  45  (1897),  p.  61. 


40 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


There  has  long  been  a  desire  manifested  by  workers  in  this  field  to 
establish  some  definite  relation  between  the  specific  gravity  of  the 
wheat  kernel  and  its  composition,  or  at  least  its  nitrogen  content. 
Very  contradictory  results  have  been  obtained  by  several  experi- 
menters, and  little  progress  has  been  made. 

It  is  true  that  the  various  chemical  constituents  that  go  to  com- 
pose the  wheat  kernel  have  different  specific  gravities,  and  as  those 
of  the  carbohydrates  are  ail  less  than  those  of  the  prpteids  it 
might  be  argued  that  a  wheat  having  a  large  proportion  of  proteid 
material  would  have  a  low  specific  gravity.  However,  the  specific 
gravity  of  the  ash  is  so  much  greater  than  that  of  any  other  constit- 
uent and  the  ash  in  wheats  from  different  soils  and  climates  varies  so 
much  that  these  factors  completely  prevent  the  establishment  of  a 
definite  relation.  The  size  and  number  of  the  vacuoles  also  influence 
the  specific  gravity. 

In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  as  between  kernels  of  the  same 
variety  grown  in  the  same  season  and  upon  the  same  soil,  the  specific 
gravity  is  inversely  proportional  to  the  nitrogen  content. 

CONDITIONS  AFFECTING  THE  PRODUCTION  OF  NITROGEN  IN  THE  GRAIN. 

So  far  as  the  writer  has  been  able  to  ascertain  there  is  no  literature 
bearing  directly  upon  the  conditions  affecting  the  production  of 
nitrogen  in  the  grain  of  wheat. 

'  Regarding  high  nitrogen  in  the  wheat  crop  as  arising  merely  from 
failure  on  the  part  of  the  kernel  to  develop  fully,  it  would  seem  that 
a  high  percentage  of  nitrogen  would  inevitably  be  accompanied  by 
a  small  production  of  nitrogen  per  acre.  This,  however,  does  not 
always  appear  to  be  the  case. 

Taking,  for  instance,  the  yields  of  wheat  obtained  by  Lawes  and 
Gilbert a  for  a  period  of  twenty  years,  which  they  divide  into  two 
periods  of  good  and  of  poor  crops,  each  covering  ten  years,  we  have 
the  following  figures : 


Seasons. 

Average 
yield  of 
grain  per 
acre 
(pounds). 

Weight 
per  bushel 
(pounds). 

Yield  of 
nitrogen 
per  acre 
(pounds). 

Good  crop  seasons     ....        

1,833 

60.2 

28.0 

Poor  crop  seasons                                                   .  .          .... 

1,740 

57.1 

29  8 

. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  largest  production  of  nitrogen  per  acre 
was  in  those  years  in  which  the  weight  per  bushel  and  the  yield  per 
acre  were  least. 

Of  course  this  is  not  always  the  case,  but  that  it  should  occur  at 
all  is  an  indication  that  the  conditions  that  make  for  high  nitrogen 


a  On  the  Composition  of  the  Ash  of  Wheat  Grain  and  Wheat  Straw,  London,  1884. 


CONDITIONS    AFFECTING    PRODUCTION    OF    NITROGEN. 


41 


content  in  the  grain  also  conduce  to  a  large  accumulation  of  nitrogen 
1>\  the  crop,  or  perhaps  it  would  be  more  accurate  to  say  that  the 
conditions  which  favor  a  large  accumulation  of  nitrogen  by  the  crop 
often  result  in  giving  it  a  high  nitrogen  content. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  observations  of  Deherain 
and  Dupont"  on  the  wheat  crops  of  1888  and  1889  at  Grignon.  The 
{inures  for  the  yields  of  grain,  the  percentages  of  starch  and  gluten, 
and  the  production  per  acre  of  these  constituents  for  the  two  years 
are  as  follows: 


Year. 

Yield  of 
grain  per 
hectare 

(kilos). 

Percent 
Gluten. 

age  of— 
Starch. 

Gluten  per 
hectare 
(kilos). 

Starch  per 
hectare 
(kilos). 

1888 

3,445 
2,922 

12.6 
15.3 

77.2 
61.9 

434 
447 

2,659 
1,808 

1889                   

From  this  it  will  be  seen  that  for  the  year  in  which  the  yield  of 
grain  was  less  per  acre  the  production  of  gluten  per  acre  was  greater. 
Apparently  the  conditions  were  favorable  for  a  large  accumulation 
of  nitrogen  by  the  plant  in  1889,  but  wrere  unfavorable  to  the  pro- 
duction of  starch.  If  the  latter  had  not  been  the  case,  the  crop  of 
1889  would  have  been  larger  than  the  crop  of  1888. 

A  number  of  instances  of  this  kind  have  occurred  among  the  \vheat 
crops  at  the  Nebraska  Experiment  Station.  In  fact,  it  may  be  said 
that,  in  general,  large  \4elds  of  grain  have  there  been  accompanied 
by  a  low  percentage  of  nitrogen  per  acre  as  compared  with  the  same 
properties  in  small  yields  of  grain.  The  following  table  will  show 
this: 

Production  of  nitrogen  per  acre  in  wheat  raised  at  the  Nebraska  Experiment  Station. 


Variety. 

Year. 

Yield  of 
grain 
per  acre 
(pounds). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
per  acre 
(pounds). 

Date  of 
ripen- 
ing. 

Turkish  Red 

1900 

1,980 

3.02 

52  73 

June  27 

Do  

1901 

2.370 

2.00 

43.04 

June  24 

Do 

1902 

1,800 

2.86 

51.48 

June  23 

Do 

1903 

1,864 

2  40 

44  74 

July     9 

Y;,roslav  

1900 

1,320 

3.01 

34.58 

July     2 

Do 

1901 

1,794 

2.18 

36  08 

July     1 

Do  

1903 

«962 

2.54 

24.43 

July   14 

Weissenburg.    . 

1902 

1,605 

3.16 

46.32 

June  24 

Do 

1903 

1  891 

2  10 

39  71 

July   10 

Pester  Boden... 

1902 

1,475 

2.92 

43.10 

June  24 

Do  

1903 

1,830 

2.16 

39  53 

July   10 

Average.  . 

1,717 

41.43 

«  Yield  decreased  by  lodging  of  grain. 


A  word  in  regard  to  the  character  of  the  seasons  that  produced 
these  crops  may  help  to  an  understanding  of  their  differences. 


«  Ann.  Agron.,  28  (1902),  ;x  522. 


42  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

The  season  of  1900  was  rather  dry  and  hot  from  the  time  growth 
started  in  the  spring  until  harvest.  There  was  no  time  when  there 
was  an  abundant  supply  of  moisture,  but  occasional  rains  wet  the 
soil  for  a  few  days  at  a  time.  The  temperatures  during  the  day 
were  high  and  the  air  was  dry.  In  1901  the  spring  was  quite  moist 
and  cool  until  June,  when  it  became  extremely  hot  and  dry.  A  few 
days  before  harvest  the  temperatures  ranged  above  100°  F.  daily, 
with  no  rainfall.  The  season  of  1902  was  the  direct  opposite  of  that 
of  1901,  except  that  the  change  came  earlier.  It  was  extremely  dry 
and  hot  until  the  middle  of  May,  when  abundant  rains  came,  and 
the  temperatures  were  considerably  below  normal  until  harvest. 
The  season  of  1903  was  wet  and  cool  throughout. 

In  general;  it  may  be  said  that  in  those  seasons,  like  1900  and 
1902,  in  which  the  temperatures  were  high  and  moisture  scarce  dur- 
ing all  or  the  early  part  of  the  growing  season,  the  grain  had  a  high 
percentage  of  nitrogen,  and  there  was  a  large  production  of  nitrogen 
per  acre.  In  years  of  low  temperatures  and  abundant  moisture, 
as  in  1903,  or  even  when  such  conditions  obtained  late  in  the  sea- 
son, as  in  1901,  there  were  a  low  percentage  of  nitrogen  in  the  grain 
and  a  small  production  of  nitrogen  per  acre. 

High  temperatures  and  scant  "moisture  during  early  growth  would, 
therefore,  seem  to  favor  the  accumulation  of  nitrogen  by  the  wheat 
plant. 

It  may  also  be  noted  that  these  are  the  conditions  favorable  to 
the  process  of  nitrification  and  to  the  accumulation  of  nitrates  near 
the  surface  of  the  soil. 

Comparing  the  wheat  crops  grown  at  Rothamsted  for  a  period  of 
twenty  years,  the  yields  and  nitrogen  production  of  which  have  just 
been  stated,  with  the  averages  for  -the  Nebraska-grown  wheats  con- 
tained in  the  last  table,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  yields  of  grain  were 
larger  at  Rothamsted,  but  that  the  production  of  nitrogen  per  acre 
was  considerably  greater  in  Nebraska. a 


Station. 

Yield  (in  pounds) 
per  acre  of— 

Grain. 

Nitrogen. 

1,786 
1,717 

28.9 
41.4 

Nebraska  station                              

The  maximum  production  of  nitrogen'  per  acre  at  Rothamsted 
during  the  twenty  years  was  38.1  pounds,  while  at  Nebraska  it  was 
52.7  pounds. 

There  can  be  little  doubt  as  to  whether  this  difference  was  due 
in  greater  measure  to  soil  fertility  or  to  climate.  Nowhere  is  better 

«  The  yield  of  nitrogen  at  Rothamsted  is  calculated  from  total  organic  nitrogen,  while 
at  the  Nebraska  Station  it  is  from  proteid  nitrogen. 


CONDITIONS    AFFECTING    PRODUCTION    OF    NITROGEN.  43 

tillage  given  or  are  crops  more  scientifically  provided  with  food 
than  at  Rothamsted.  It  is  true  that  of  the  ten  plots  of  land  on 
which  these  wheats  were  raised  one  received  no  manure  and  three 
were  not  sufficiently  manured.  In  order  to  make  the  comparison 
more  favorable  to  the  English  environment,  the  five  plots  completely 
manured  and  producing  the  largest  yields  may  be  taken.  The  yield 
of  nitrogen  per  acre  was  36.4  pounds  for  the  years  1852-1861  and 
34.6  pounds  for  1862-1871.  Even  with  the  best  manuring  the  yields 
of  nitrogen  fall  very  much  short  of  those  in  Nebraska. 

In  Nebraska  no  commercial  fertilizers  had  ever  been  used  on  the 
land  on  which  the  wheats  were  grown,  but  farm  manure  had  been 
applied.  The  soil  was  a  heavy  one,  well  adapt'ed  to  wheat  growing, 
and  had  been  well  tilled.  It  had  been  well  manured  for  corn  in  a 
rotation  of  corn,  oats,  and  wheat.  The  varieties,  with  the  exception 
of  Turkish  Red,  had  just  been  introduced  from  Europe  and  had  not 
fully  adapted  themselves  to  the  new  environment.  The  average 
nitrogen  production  for  the  only  acclimated  variety,  Turkish  Red, 
was  48  pounds  per  acre.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  a  climate 
affording  high  temperatures,  dry  air,  and  a  moderately  dry  soil  is 
favorable  to  the  accumulation  of  a  large  amount  of  nitrogen  by  the 
wheat  plant,  provided  there  is  a  large  supply  of  nitrogen  in  the  soil. 

The  heat  and  scant  soil  moisture  are  doubtless  instrumental  in 
making  available  the  nitrogen  of  the  humus,  and  the  bright  sunshine 
and  dry,  hot  air  stimulate  growth  and  increase  transpiration. 

It  has  just  been  said  that  hot,  dry  weather  in  the  early  growing 
season  contributes  to  a  large  nitrogen  accumulation  by  the  wheat 
plant.  The  same  conditions  cut  short  the  growing  period  of  the 
plant  and  prevent  the  large  accumulation  of  starch  that  takes  place 
in  the  kernel  of  wheat  raised  in  a  cool  or  moist  region.  It  thus 
happens  that  such  wheats  are  high  in  nitrogen  and  low  in  starch. 

The  properties  of  the  wheat  kernel  characteristic  of  a  continental 
climate  and  rich  soil  are  probably  due  to  rapid  nitrification  and 
highly  stimulated  growth  causing  a  large  accumulation  of  nitrogen 
by  the  crop,  and  to  incomplete  maturation,  caused  either  by  heat, 
or  frost,  or  lack  of  moisture,  resulting  in  high  nitrogen. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  know  what  relation  the  production  of 
nitrogen  per  acre  bears  to  the  production  of  mineral  matter,  but 
the  necessary  figures  are  not  at  hand. 

The  wheat  kernel  produced  in  a  continental  climate  is  not  usually 
plump  as  compared  with  the  kernel  produced  in  an  insular  or  coastal 
one.  The  yield  of  grain  per  acre  is  also  usually  less.  That  this  is 
due  to  incomplete  maturation  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  winter 
varieties  of  wheat  that  make  their  growth  early  in  the  season  always 
yield  better  than  spring  varieties.  The  latter,  on  the  other  hand, 
have  a  higfier  percentage  of  nitrogen,  but  usually  not  so  large  a 


44  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

nitrogen  production.  Their  disadvantage  lies  in  the  fact  that  their 
roots  are  not  sufficiently  developed  to  absorb  a  large  quantity  of 
nitrogenous  matter  at  the  time  most  favorable  for  its  accumulation. 
As  a  maximum  nitrogen  accumulation  is  the  chief  desideratum, 
spring  wheats  are  not  desirable  where  winter  ones  can  be  grown. 

This  does  not  mean  that  a  variety  of  wheat  which  has  been  grown, 
for  instance,  in  England  will  show  all  the  qualities  of  an  inland 
wheat  when  first  grown  in  Kansas  or  Nebraska.  Such  a  wheat  will 
undergo  modifications  that  will  give  it  some  of  these  qualities,  such, 
for  instance,  as  less  well-filled  kernels,  and  less  weight  per  bushel. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Turkish  Red  wheat,  when  raised  in  a  cool, 
moist  climate,  becomes  later  maturing,  and  the  kernel  becomes 
plumper,  more  starchy,  and  softer.  It  is  between  varieties  adapted 
each  to  its  peculiar  climate,  and  raised  there  for  years,  that  these 
distinctions  are  most  marked,  but  the  fact  that  a  modification  of 
any  variety  begins  at  once  when  transferred  from  one  climate  to 
another  shows  that  such  qualities  as  those  mentioned  are  influenced 
by  the  climate. 

It  must  be  quite  apparent,  although  it  has  not  often  been  remarked, 
that  the  ordinary  selection  of  seed  wheat  to  increase  the  yield  has 
resulted  in  producing  a  grain  of  lower  nitrogen  content. 

This  has  been  noticed  by  Girard  and  Lindet  •'  and  by  Biff  en, b  and 
incidentally  by  Balland,r  who,  in  commenting  on  the  decrease  in 
the  nitrogen  content  of  wheat  in  northern  France  and  the  increased 
yields,  attributes  the  former  to  a  deficiency  of  nitrogen  in  the  fer- 
tilizers used,  and  states  that  the  gluten  in  the  wheat  of  that  region 
in  1848  ranged  from  10.23  to  13.02  per  cent,  while  fifty  years  later 
it  ranged  from  8.96  to  10.62  per  cent.  In  the  same  time  the  aver- 
age yield  increased  from  14  to  17.5  hectoliters  per  hectare.  In  the 
light  of  the  results  of  experiments  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  nitroge- 
nous fertilizers  upon  the  composition  of  wheat,  it  can  not  be  supposed 
that  this  decrease  in  nitrogen  content  can  be  due  primarily  to  lack 
of  nitrogen.  It  would  seem  more  likely  that  the  increased  yield 
was  largely  due  to  the  deposition  of  starch  in  the  grain,  and  that 
consequently  the  percentage  of  gluten  was  smaller. 

Has  the  improvement  in  the  yield  of  wheat  been  accompanied  by 
a  greater  yield  of  nitrogen  per  acre?  It  is  evident  that  the  increase 
in  the  grain  and  that  in  the  nitrogen  are  not  proportional,  but  it  is 

«  Le  Froment  et  sa  Monture,  Paris,  1903. 
&  Nature  (London),  69  (1903),  No.  1778,  pp.  92,  93. 

c  Abstract  in  Centrlb.  f.  Agr.  Chem.,  1897,  p.  785,  from  Compt.  Rend.,  124  (1897), 
p.  158. 


CONDITIONS    AFFECTING    PRODUCTION    OF    NITROGEN. 


45 


desirable  to  know  whether  there  has  been  any  increase  in  nitrogen 
per  acre.  Returning  to  the  figures  given  by  Balland  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  wheat  of  1848  produced  on  an  average  163  kilos  per  hec- 
tare, while  that  of  fifty  years  later  produced  171  kilos,  an  increase 
of  about  5  per  cent  in  gluten  per  hectare,  with  an  increase  of  25  per 
cent  in  yield.  These  figures  £an  not,  of  course,  be  taken  as  strictly 
accurate,  as  they  are  based  merely  on  what  M.  Balland  refers  to  as 
the  range  of  nitrogen  content. 

Some  data  on  this  subject  are  available  in  the  published  records 
of  wheat  improvement  at  the  Minnesota  Experiment  Station. a 
Yields  and  gluten  content  of  improved  varieties  and  of  the  original 
variety  from  which  the  improved  strains  have  been  developed  by 
selection  are  given.  The  figures  cover  the  same  seasons  for  all 
varieties,  and  the  averages  of  six  trials  are  reported  for  each,  as 
follows : 


Variety. 

Yield  per 
acre 
(bushels). 

Percent- 
age of 
dry  glu- 
ten. 

Gluten 
per  acre 
(pounds). 

Nitrogen 
per  acre 
(pounds). 

Minnesota  No  149  produced  from  Power's  Fife 

25.6 

13.5 

207.4 

36.4 

power's  Fife,  unmodified  by  selection  
Minnesota  No.  U9.  produced  from  Havne's  Blue  Stem  
Havne's  Blue  Stem,  unmodified  bv  selection  .  .  . 

23.6 
28.5 
24.6 

14.0 
12.5 
13.4 

198.2 
213.7 
198.8 

34.8 
37.5 
34.7 

In  each  case  the  new  variety  yielded  more  grain  per  acre,  possessed 
a  lower  gluten  content,  and  produced  more  nitrogen  per  acre  in  the 
grain.  It  should  be  explained  that  determinations  of  gluten  and 
baking  tests  were  made  of  strains  of  wheat  produced  by  the  selection 
of  individual  plants,  and  that  the  quantity  and  quality  of  the  gluten 
in  these  strains  were  considered  in  deciding  which  strain  was  to  be 
perpetuated.  For  that  reason  the  gluten  content  of  the  improved 
wheat  is  doubtless  greater  than  it  would  have  been  if  no  attention 
had  been  paid  to  those  qualities.  Incidentally  it  may  be  stated 
that  the  quality  of  the  gluten  in  these  new  varieties  of  wheat  origi- 
nated by  Professor  Hays  is  much  better  than  that  in  the  original 
varieties.  The  difference  between  selection  for  gluten  carried  on  in 
this  way  and  selection  for  gluten  applied  to  the  individual  plant  is 
that  the  latter  must  increase  many  times  the  opportunity  for  devel- 
oping a  strain  of  desirable  gluten  content. 

Returning  to  the  nitrogen  production  per  acre,  it  is  apparent  that 
it  is  slightly  greater  in  the  improved  wheats,  or  at  least  is  not  less 
than  in  the  original  varieties.  This  is  encouraging,  as  it  indicates 
the  possibility  of  increasing  the  production  of  gluten  per  acre. 

«  Minnesota  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  63. 


46  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

Gluten  is  the  valuable  constituent  of  wheat.  The  wheat  growing 
of  the  future  may  be  looked  upon  as  a  gluten-producing  industry. 
The  problem  is  to  secure  the  highest  possible  quantity  and  quality 
of  gluten  per  acre.  If  this  can  be  done  by  sacrificing  starch  produc- 
tion, it  will  be  economical.  Starch  can  be  more  cheaply  produced 
in  other  crops  and,  if  necessary,  added  to  the  flour  of  wheat. 

It  may  be  argued  that  this  is  not  to  the  interest  of  the  farmer. 
But  it  is  clearly  to  the  interest  of  mankind  and  any  step  toward 
its  accomplishment  must  in  the  end  redound  to  the  advantage  of 
the  farmer. 


II. 


EXPERIMENTAL 


SOME  PROPERTIES  OF  THE  WHEAT  KERNEL. 


If  a  number  of  wheat  kernels  of  the  same  variety  and  raised  under 
similar  conditions  are  separated  into  approximately  equal  parts  with 
regard  to  their  specific  gravity,  the  kernels  of  low  specific  gravity 
will  be  found  to  contain  a  higher  percentage  of  both  total  and  proteid 
nitrogen  than  the  kernels  having  a  high  specific  gravity. 

A  number  of  samples  of  wheat  grown  in  different  years  and  repre- 
senting different  varieties  were  separated  into  approximately  equal 
parts  by  throwing  the  kernels  into  a  solution  of  calcium  chlorid  hav- 
ing such  a  density  that  about  half  the  kernels  would  float  and  the 
other  half  sink.  The  specific  gravity  of  the  solution  in  which  each 
sample  was  separated  is  given  in  Table  1  and  the  signs  <C  and  >>  are 
used  to  represent  "less  than"  and  "greater  than/'  respectively. 
Thus  "  <1.29"  means  that  the  kernels  have  a  specific  gravity  of  less 
than  1.29,  while  ">1.29"  indicates  that  the  kernels  have  a  specific 
gravity  greater  than  1.29. 

TABLE  1. — Analyses  of  kernels  of  high  and  of  low  specific  gravity. 


Serial  number.           J££itv, 

Percentage  of— 

Name  of  variety  and  year  of 
growth. 

Total 
nitrogen. 

Proteid 
nitrogen." 

Nonpro- 
teid 
nitrogen. 

, 

<1.290 
>1.290 
<1.286 
>1.286 
<1.250 
>1.250 
<1.265 
>1.265 
<1.264 
>1.264 

3.51 
3.27 
2.51 
2.51 
2.80 
2.78 
2.95 
2.66 
3.30 
3.06 

2.49 
2.39 
1.88 
1.94 
2.26 
2.15 
2.13 
2.01 
2.41 
2.29 

1.02 

.88 
.63 
.57 
.54 
.63 
.82 
.65 
.89 
.77 

{•Hickman,  grown  hi  1895. 

'Turkish  Red,  grown  in  1897. 

Spring  wheat,  Marvel,  grown 
in  1897. 
Spring  wheat,   Velvet  Chaff 
grown  hi  1897. 

Turkish  Red,  grown  in  1898. 

2.                             .     •    . 

30 

31  

38 

39  

40  

41 

59  
60. 

a  Proteid  nitrogen  in  this  paper  =  nitrogen  by  Stutzer's  method.    Proteids  =  proteid  nitrogen  x  5.7. 

With  the  exception  of  serial  Nos.  30  and  31  the  kernels  of  low 
specific  gravity  have  in  each  case  a  higher  percentage  of  both  total 
and  proteid  nitrogen  than  have  the  kernels  of  high  specific  gravity. 
It  will  also  be  noticed  that  the  percentage  of  nonproteid  nitrogen  is 
greater  in  the  kernels  of  low  specific  gravity. 

Samples  of  wheat  were  also  divided  into  light  and  heavy  portions 

by  means  of  a  machine  which  operates  by  directing  upward  a  current 

of  air,  the  velocity  of  which  can  be  regulated.     Into  this  current  the 

grain  is  directed.     The  result  is  that  the  heavy  kernels  and  the  large 

27889— No.  78—05 4  49 


50 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


kernels  fall,  and  the  light  kernels  and  small  kernels  are  driven  out. 
The  separation  thus  accomplished  is  somewhat  different  from  that 
effected  by  a  solution,  the  difference  being  that  the  latter  separates 
the  kernels  entirely  according  to  their  specific  gravities  while  with 
the  air  blast  a  large  kernel  of  a  certain  specific  gravity  might  descend 
with  the  heavy  kernels,  when  if  it  were  smaller,  although  of  the  same 
specific  gravity,  it  would  be  blown  out. 

The  number  of  light  kernels  that  descend  on  account  of  their  large 
size  is  relatively  small,  owing  to  the  fact  that  large  kernels  are,  as  a 
rule,  of  higher  specific  gravity  than  small  ones.  The  following  test 
was  made  to  determine  the  relation  between  the  size  of  wheat  ker- 
nels and  their  specific  gravity.  An  average  lot  of  wheat  was  nearly 
equally  divided  by  means  of  two  sieves  into  three  portions  represent- 
ing medium,  small,  and  large  kernels.  Each  of  these  portions  was 
then  thrown  upon  solutions  of  the  same  specific  gravity,  and  the  pro- 
portion by  weight  that  floated,  or  light  seed,  and  the  proportion  that 
sank,  or  heavy  seed,  were  determined. 

TABLE  2. — Proportion  of  light  and  of  heavy  seed. 


Kind  of  seed. 

Heavy  seed 
(grams)  . 

Light  seed 
(grams). 

Ratio. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Small 

8.72 
9.62 
11.96 

11.28 

10.78 
8.04 

1 
1 
1 

1.29 
1.12 

.67 

Medium  

Large                                   .                                    ... 

The  weight  of  light  kernels  among  the  small  was  nearly  twice  that 
of  light  kernels  among  the  large  seeds. 

Analyses  of  samples  of  wheat  separated  by  this  machine  into  light 
and  heavy  kernels  gave  about  the  same  results  as  the  samples  sepa- 
rated by  solutions  of  certain  specific  gravities. 

TABLE  3. — Analyses  of  large,  heavy  kernels  and  of  small,  light  kernels. 


Serial  number. 

Relative 
weight. 

Percentage  of— 

Name  of  variety  and  year  of 
growth. 

Total 
nitrogen. 

Proteid 
nitrogen. 

Nonpro- 
teid 
nitrogen. 

10  ".'. 

Light  
Heavy  

2.99 
2.76 
2.77 
2.70 
2.91 
2.65 
2.45 
2.19 
3.12 
3.02 
3.13 
2.95 
3.30 
2.46 
2.35 
2.11 

2.21 
2.04 
2.11 
2.04 
2.29 
2.04 
2.00 
1.96 
3.10 
2.93 
2.82 
2.65 
3.06 
2.24 
2.13 
1.94 

0.78 
.72 
.66 
.66 
.62 
.61 
.45 
.23 
.02 
.09 
.31 
.30 
.24 
.22 
.22 
.17 

\  Spring  wheat,  Marvel,  grown 
I"    in  1896. 

Currell,  grown  in  1898. 
Spring  wheat,  grown  in  1898. 
Big  Frame,  grown  in  1899. 
Turkish  Red,  grown  in  1900. 
Big  Frame,  grown  in  1900. 
•Big  Frame,  grown  in  1901. 
Turkish  Red,  grown  in  1901. 

57 

Light 

58 

Heavy 

65  

Light... 

66 

Heavy 

80  

81 

Light  
Heavv  

383 

Light 

384  

Heavy  

385 

Light  

386 

Heavy 

602  

Light... 

603 

Heavy  . 

613... 
612  

Light  
Heavy  

SoME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL.  51 

It  thus  becomes  very  apparent  that  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  is 
relatively  greater  in  the  light  wheat  selected  in  the  manner  described. 

It  is  well  known  that  immature  wheat  is  of  lighter  weight  than 
mature  wheat  and  that  it  contains  a  greater  percentage  of  nonproteid 
nitrogen.  In  a  field  of  wheat  there  are  always  certain  plants  that 
mature  early,  others  that  mature  late,  and  some  that  never  reach  a 
normal  state  of  maturity.  The  last  condition  is  very  likely  to  occur 
in  a  region  of  limited  rainfall  and  intense  summer  heat.  The  con- 
ditions most  favorable  for  the  filling  out  of  the  grain  are  shown  to  be 
an  abundance  of  soil  moisture  and  a  fair  degree  of  warmth.  The 
more  nearly  the  conditions  are  the  reverse  of  this  the  more  shriveled 
the  kernel  and  the  lighter  the  weight.  In  the  same  variety  and  in 
the  same  field  there  are  kernels  that  are  small  and  shriveled  because 
of  immaturity,  disease,  or  lack  of  nutriment.  All  of  these  classes 
would  appear  among  the  " light"  kernels  separated  in  this  way. 

In  order  to  approach  the  question  from  another  standpoint,  a  num- 
ber of  spikes  of  wheat  of  the  Turkish  Red  variety  were  selected  in  the 
field,  care  being  taken  that  all  were  fully  ripe,  and  that  they  were 
composed  of  healthy,  well-formed  kernels.  These  spikes  were  sam- 
pled by  removing  one  row  of  spikelets  from  each  spike  and  the  kernels 
so  removed  were  tested  for  moisture,  proteid  nitrogen,  specific 
gravity,  and  weight  of  kernel,  and  from  the  last  two  the  relative 
volume  was  calculated.  It  will  be  shown  later  that  a  sample  taken 
in  this  way  permits  of  an  accurate  estimation  of  the  average  com- 
position of  the  kernels  on  the  spike. 

The  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  row  of  spikelets 
on  each  spike  was  calculated  from  the  data  mentioned,  and  the 
average  weight  of  the  kernels  on  the  row  of  spikelets  was  determined 
from  their  total  weight  and  number,  thus  permitting  of  the  estima- 
tion of  the  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel 
on  ea-ch  spike. 

In  Table  4  the  spikes  having  a  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  from  2  to 
2.5  per  cent  are  arranged  in  one  group,  and  on  the  same  line  with  each 
spike  are  placed  the  number  of  kernels  on  one  row  of  spikelets,  weight 
of  these  kernels,  weight  of  average  kernel,  relative  volume  of  average 
kernel,  specific  gravity  of  kernel,  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  one 
row  of  spikelets,  and  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  average  kernel. 
Spikes  having  a  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  from  2.5  to  3  per  cent  are 
similarly  arranged,  and  so  with  all  spikes  up  to  4  per  cent.  The  aver- 
age for  each  group  is  shown  in  the  table. 

There  are,  in  all,  257  spikes,  of  which  18  have  from  2  to  2.5  per  cent 
proteid  nitrogen.  82  from  2.5  to  3  per  cent,  107  from  3  to  3.5  per  cent, 
and  49  from  3.5  to  4  per  cent. 


52 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  4. — Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content  of  kernels. 

Crop  of  1902. 


2  TO  2.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


Record 
number. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels on 
row  of 
spikelets. 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Volume 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Specific 
gravity 
of  ker-. 
nels. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid    nitrogen 
(gram)  in  — 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

183 

17 
16 
14 
15 
18 
21 
22 
15 
15 
21 
14 
19 
17 
21 
13 
17 
16 
16 

0.4772 
.4425 
.  3724 
.4824 
.5221 
.5336 
.6708 
.4549 
.40$ 
.6689 
.4336 
.4787 
.4594 
.5878 
.2771 
.4566 
.4110 
.4318 

0.0280 
.0276 
.0266 
.0321 
.0290 
.0254 
.0304 
.0303 
.0270 
.0318 
.0309 
.0251 
.0258 
.0279 
.0213 
.0268 
.0256 
.0269 

2.06 
2.37 
2.41 
2.41 
2.23 
2.24 
2.02 
2.44 
2.36 
2.33 
2.35 
2.28  . 
2.33 
2.44 
2.44 
2.36 
2.38 
2.37 

0.00983 
.01049 
.00897 
.01548 
.01616 
.01195 
.01354 
.01110 
.00959 
.01559 
.01019 
.01091 
.01070 
.01434 
.00676 
.01078 
.00978 
.01023 

0.000577 
.000654 
.000642 
.000774 
.000647 
.000569 
.000614 
.000739 
.000637 
.000742 
.000726 
.000572 
.000601 
.000681 
.000520 
.000632 
.000609 
.000638 

188 

193  

205 

0.0241 
.0209 
.0189 
.0220 
.0216 
.0192 
.0235 
.0225 
.0183 
.0188 
.0200 

1.3323 
.3850 
1.3424 
1.3853 
.4031 
1.4074 
1.3544 
1.3735 
1.3680 
1.3718 
1.3915 

291  

304  

318 

347  

357 

358... 

380  

396 

402  

406  

415 

440 

444 

445 

Average... 

17 

.4759 

.0266 

.0209 

1.374 

2.323           .01141 

.000643 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


181 

19 

0.4482 

0.0235 

2.66 

0.01192 

0.  000625 

182  

17 

.4299 

.0252 

2.76 

.01187 

.000696 

185  ' 

19 

.5041 

.0265 

2.71 

.01366 

.000718 

187 

15 

.3945 

.0263 

2.99 

.01180 

.000786 

189.. 

18 

.4871 

.0270 

2.64 

.01286 

.000713 

196 

17 

.4995 

.0293 

2.71 

.01354 

.000794 

197 

20 

.5683 

.0284 

2  85 

.01620 

000809 

199 

17 

.4589 

.0269 

2.99 

.  01372 

.000804 

207  
210  

15 
14 

.4584 
.3955 

.0305 
.0282 

0.0230 

.0288 

1.3248 
1.2363 

2.73 
2.95 

.01709 
.01167 

.000833 
.000832 

211 

17 

.5211 

.0306 

.  0228 

1.3416 

2.90 

.01511 

.000887 

212... 

15 

.4298 

.0286 

.0211 

1.3537 

2.97 

.01277 

.000849 

217  

18 

.6299 

.0349 

.0259 

1.3461 

2.86 

.01802 

.000998 

218 

18 

.5130 

.0285 

.0214 

1.3303 

2.58 

.  01324 

.000735 

219  

19 

.3862 

.0203 

.0157 

1.2950 

2.71 

.  01047 

.000550 

222  

227 

19 
19 

.4611 
.5581 

.0242 
.0293 

.0182 
.0214 

1.3331 
1.3704 

2.93 
2.71 

.01351 

01624 

.000709 
000794 

229  

17 

.4849 

.0285 

.  0206 

.3856 

2.96 

.  01387 

.000844 

230  
238  
239  

241 

15 
17 
17 

18 

.4867 
.5166 
.3910 
.4230 

.0324 
.0303 
.0230 
.0235 

.0234 
.0220 
.01649 
.0178 

.3815 
.3794 
.3941 
.3196 

2.54 
2.70 
2.60 
2.76 

.01236 
'.01395 
.01017 
.01168 

.000823 
'  .00u818 
.000598 
000o49 

242  
252  

Ill 

18 
19 
14  " 

.4562 
.4898 
.3792 

.0253 
.02578 
.0270 

.0184 
.0186 
.0203 

.3753 
.3875 
.3286 

2.96 
2.55 

2.86 

.01350 
.  01249 
.  01U85 

.000749 
.000o55 

00u772 

288... 

17 

.4956 

.0291 

.0217 

.3428 

2.82 

.01398 

.000821 

289  

293 

19 
17 

.5042 

.4858 

.0265 
.0285 

.0187 
.0206 

.4155 
.3835 

2.53 
2.64 

.01276 
.  01283 

.000670 
000752 

294  

19 

.4173 

.0219 

.0159 

.3813 

2.56 

.  01068 

.000561 

302  

22 

.5569 

.0253 

.0190 

.3312 

2.68 

.01437 

000678 

306 

19 

.4922 

.0258 

.0185 

.3996 

2.51 

.01235 

000650 

308  

315... 

15 
16 

.4951 
.4994 

.0330 
.0312 

.0237 
.0224 

.392 
.3916 

2.85 
2.75 

.01411 
.  01373 

.000941 
000858 

319 

17 

.4644 

.0273 

.0203 

3447 

2  86 

01328 

000781 

320  

322..  . 

18 
16 

.5668 
.5107 

.0314 
.0219 

.0229 
.0236 

.3710 
.352 

2.98 
2.55 

.01689 
.01302 

.000938 
000813 

329  
330  

332 

12 
17 
16 

.3903 
.3431 
.4847 

.0325 
.0201 
.0302 

.0234 
.0161 
.0218 

.3911 
.2498 
.3879 

2.88 
2.62 
2.58 

.01241 
.00899 
.01251 

.000936 
.000527 
000779 

334 

18 

.5399 

.0299 

.  0215 

3922 

2  62 

01415 

000783 

335  

18 

.6474 

.0359 

.0258 

.3928 

2.82 

.01826 

.001012 

337 

15 

.4497 

.0299 

.0215 

.3877 

2.89 

.01345 

.000864 

340 

20 

.4155 

0207 

.0153 

3550 

2  74 

01138 

000567 

341  

15 

.5058 

.0337 

.0243 

.3890 

2.97 

.01502 

.001001 

342 

14 

.4486 

.0320 

.0228 

.4037 

2.60 

.01166 

000832 

343  

344  

13 
16 

.4112 
.4004 

.0316 
.0250 

.0224 
.0184 

.4107 
.3611 

2.50 
2.93 

.01028 
.01173 

.000791 
.000733 

345. 

18 

.5422 

.0301 

.0216 

.3919 

2  56 

.01388 

.000771 

346 

19 

6393 

0336 

0242 

3913 

2  55 

01630 

000857 

348 

18 

6328 

0351 

0262 

3415 

2  88 

01822 

001010 

SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


53 


TABLE  4. — Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content  of  kernels. 

Crop  of  1902— Continued. 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROCf EN— Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels on 
row  of 
spikelets. 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Volume 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Percent- 
Specific      age  of 
gravity     proteid 
of  ker-     nitrogen 
nels.        in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid    nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

•fr™*-    AiSST 

349 

17 
16 
21 
16 
19 
15 
24 
14 
18 
18 
18 
12 
14 
12 
16 
19 
21 
16 
15 
16 
17 
14 
15 
18 
17 
18 
16 
22 
23 
18 
19 
13 

0.4573 
.4437 
.6386 
.5008 
.5304 
.3882 
.6375 
.3297 
.4724 
.5695 
.5861 
.2677 
.4099 
.3416 
.4921 
.5177 
.5830 
.3547 
.3494 
.3897 
.4805 
.3448 
.3097 
.4991 
.4635 
.5714 
.4624 
.6138 
.6997 
.5600 
.5327 
.4131 

0.0269 
.0277 
.0304 
.0313 
.0279 
.0259 
.0265 
.0235 
.0262 
.0316 
.0325 
.0223 
.0292 
.0284 
.0307 
.0272 
.0277 
.0221 
.0232 
.0243 
.0282 
.0246 
.0206 
.0277 
.0272 
.0317 
.0289 
.0279 
.0304 
.0311 
.0280 
.0317 

0.0195 
.0199 
.0217 
.0223 
.0200 
.0186 
.0191 
.0170 
.0191 
.0227 
.0235 
.0162 
.0212 
.0206 
.0223 
.0198 
.0204 
.0171 
.0165 
.0180 
.0206 

.3822 
.3891 
.4002 
.4022 
.390 
.3915 
.3840 
.3819 
.3729 
.3906 
.3838 
.3747 
.3761 
.3771 
.3741 
.3758 
.3569 
.2947 
.4070 
.3508 
.3693 

2.66 
2.64 
2.73 
2.84 
2.91 
2.97 
2.89 
2.94 
2.92 
2.99 
2.87 
2.60 
2.75 
2.96 
2.52 
'      2.73 
2.% 
2.94 
2.70 
2.77 
2.98 
2.86 
2.53 
2.62 
2.60 
2.82 
2.86 
2.88 
2.67 
2.98 
2.93 
2.51 

0.01216 
.01171 
.01743 
.01422 
.01543 
.01153 
.01842 
.00969 
.01379 
.01703 
.01682 
.00696 
.01127 
.01011 
.01240 
.01413 
.01726 
.01043 
.00943 
.01079 
.01432 
.00986 
.00784 
.01308 
.01205 
.01611 
.01322 
.01768 
.01868 
.01669 
.01561 
.01037 

0.000716 
.000731 
.000830 
.000889 
.000812 
.000769 
.000766 
.000691 
.000765 
.000945 
.000933 
.000580 
.000803 
.000841 
.000774 
.000743 
.000820 
.000650 
.000626 
.000673 
.000840 
.000704 
.000521 
.000726 
.000707 
.000894 
.000827 
.000834 
.000812 
.000927 
.000820 
.000796 

350  

354. 

355... 
356  

359  
360  

361  

364 

371  

373 

376... 

378  

383  
386  

387 

389  

392  

393... 
394  

395 

41fl  

421  

424  ... 

428  

430 

434  

436 

438  

439  

441  

443  
Average... 

17.07 

.4791 

.0279           .0207         1.3680 

2.76           .01332 

.000776 

3  TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


173... 

20 

0.5913 

0.0295 

3  08 

0  01821 

0  000909 

17o  

21 

.5773 

.0274 

3  46 

01997 

000948 

17fi  

20 

.5804 

.0290 

3  10 

01799 

000899 

190  

18 

.4673 

.0259 

3  25 

01519 

000842 

191  

17 

.4279 

.0251 

3  25 

01091 

000816 

192... 

17 

.4126 

.0242 

3  12 

01287 

000755 

194  

13 

.3218 

.0247 

3  43 

01104 

000847 

195  

19 

.4924 

.0259 

3  33 

01640 

000862 

198  

18 

.4683 

.0260 

3  18 

01489 

000827 

200  

18 

.5764 

.0320 

3  24 

01868 

001040 

202 

14 

3824 

0273 

0  0200 

3615 

3  13 

011Q7 

203  

16 

.5251 

0328 

0241 

3614 

3  07 

01612 

001007 

206. 

17 

3392 

0199 

0157 

2709 

3  44 

01166' 

OOfifiRS 

208 

19 

4939 

0259 

0192 

3494 

301 

213  

15 

.4116 

0274 

0204 

3415 

3  31 

01362 

000007 

214 

16 

4371 

0273 

0208 

3082 

3  09 

ftlQCI 

216... 

15 

.3122 

0208 

0165 

J588 

3  33 

01040 

'«m.  'I.-; 

220..  . 

17 

5040 

0296 

0222 

3350 

3  20 

01613 

OOTW47 

223 

17 

4795 

Q282 

0204 

3Q70 

301 

226... 
228  

21 
14 

.5380 
4143 

.0256 
0295 

.0170 
0211 

.4951 
3945 

3.11 
3  40 

.01673 

0140Q 

.000796 

231 

18 

5888 

0327 

0242 

3514 

0  1  1 

232... 

13 

.3825 

0294 

0221 

3280 

3  11 

01190 

'  n  N  f  *  •  : 

233  

17 

5331 

0313 

0231 

•->-,  -s 

3  32 

234 

16 

5201 

0325 

0243 

•J-JCO 

300 

236... 

25 

7451 

0298 

0220 

3504 

3  19 

02377 

OOOQ^I 

243.. 

24 

6349 

ir>.  1 

0196 

3487 

3  47 

099ft3 

244 

19 

5839 

0307 

0214 

40nr 

0  Of) 

249  

16 

4415 

0275 

0199 

3850 

3  21 

01417 

000883 

250  

251 

15 
22 

.4514 
6190 

.0300 
0281 

.0213 
0203 

.4100 

oooo 

3.12 

o  if: 

.01408 

.000936 

255... 

18  ' 

5948 

0330 

0233 

4146 

3  03 

01802 

001000 

256  

2j 

5277 

0251 

0184 

3629 

3  31 

01747 

(vvujoo 

258 

17 

4703 

noil 

'-'(  !•  "> 

300 

54 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  4. — Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content  of  kernels. 

Crop  of  1902 — Continued. 

3  TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN— Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels on 
row  of 
spikelets. 

Weight  (in  grams) 

Volume 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Specific 
gravity 
of  ker- 
nels. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

•R-AmpiQ   Average 
Kernels.    kernel- 

262 

18 
18 
18 
18 
19 
17 
20 
14 
15 
18 
18 
15 
15 
21 
18 
19 
19 
16 
13 
20 
18 
15 
15 
17 
17 
18 
17 
17 
17 
16 
16 
13 
16 
15 
15 
16 
19 
17 
20 
19 
19 
17 
17 
17 
18 
14 
18 
13 
19 
19 
19 
18 
12 
20 
16 
17 
18 
20 
14 
19 
15 
21 
18 
16 
18 
19 
20 
18 
21 
20 
16 
17 

0.4604 
.5040 
.4138 
.4429 
.5010 
.4531 
.5183 
.3275 
.3858 
.4559 
.4862 
.3973 
.4715 
.6938 
.4973 
.5205 
.4994 
.5492 
.3452 
.4122 
.4867 
.4324 
.4122 
.4157 
.4412 
.5484 
.4075 
.4230 
.5110 
.4039 
.4610 
.3637 
.3803 
.3843 
.4497 
.4726 
.5258 
.4214 
.5351 
.3877 
.5560 
.4200 
.4811 
.5249 
.5147 
.3173 
.5271 
.3506 
.5057 
.5799 
.4764 
.4474 
.3058 
.5720 
.3996 
.5000 
.4286 
.5368 
.3479 
.5044 
.4269 
.4995 
.4845 
.4801 
.5166 
.5433 
.4704 
.4119 
.6306 
.5206 
.4336 
.3889 

0.0255 
.0280 
.0229 
.0246 
.0263 
.0266 
.0259 
.0233 
.0257 
.0253 
.0270 
.0264 
.0314 
.0330 
.0276 
.0273 
.0262 
.0343 
.0265 
.0206 
.0270 
.0288 
.0274 
.0244 
.0259 
.0304 
.0239 
.0248 
.0300 
.0252 
.0288 
.0279 
.0237 
.0256 
.0299 
.0295 
.0276 
.0247 
.0267 
.0204 
.0292 
.0247 
.0283 
.0308 
.0285 
.0226 
.0292 
.0269 
.0266 
.0305 
.0250 
.0248 
.0254 
.0286 
.0249 
.0294 
.0238 
.0268 
.0248 
.0265 
.0284 
.0237 
.0269 
.0300 
.0287 
.0285 
.0235 
.0228 
.0300 
.0260 
.0271 
.0228 

0.0193 
.0197 
.0169 
.0189 
.0187 
.0209 
.0191 
.0177 
.0190 
.0178 
.0197 
.0191 
.0226 
.0241 
.0200 
.0201 
.0188 
.0249 
.0197 
.0140 
.0198 
.0210 
.0201 
.0178 
.0193 
.0207 
.0177 
.0180 
.0220 
.0191 
.0206 
.0198 
.0171 
.0186 
.0217 
.0211 
.0201 
.0185 
.0197 
.0151 
.0214 
.0180 
.0206 
.0218 
.0203 
.0174 
.0213 
.0199 
.0194 
.0221 
.0181 
.0182 
.0188 
.0206 
.0183 
.0211 
.0180 

3216 
4206 
3544 
3005 
4090 
2748 
.3541 
3143 
.3564 
.4228 
.3711 
.3815 
.3903 
.3693 
.3795 
.3608 
.3945 
.3787 
.3432 
.4727 
.3681 
.3718 
.3657 
.3733 
.3424 
.4660 
.3487 
.3740 
.3658 
.3225 
.3956 
.4102 
.3828 
.3812 
.38^ 
.3988 
.3701 
.3350 
.  3555 
.3497 
.3621 
.3735 
.3714 
.4142 
.4018 
.3013 
,  .  3703 
.3544 
.3728 
.3773 
.3806 
.3628 
.3510 
.3837 
.3575 
.  3927 
.3221 

3.20 
3.24 
3.37 
3.30 
3.11 
3.21 
3.37 
3.39 
3.14 
3.39 
3.33 
3.15 
3.12 
3.26 
3.02 
3.06 
3.07 
3.09 
3.07 
3.19 
3.16 
3.49 
3.16 
3.36 
3.43 
3.43 
3.43 
3.19 
3.46 
3.45 
3.26 
3.36 
3.33 
3.32 
3.05 
3.11 
3.03 
3.17 
3.37 
3.06 
3.34 
3.09 
3.31 
3.15 
3.41 
3.47 
3.09 
3.45 
3.23 
3.05 
3.22 
3.26 
3.10 
3.35 
3.37 
3.04 
3.30 
3.27 
3.15 
3.14 
3.24 
3.05 
3.14 
3.30 
3.09 
3  06 

0.01473 
.01633 
.01395 
.01462 
.01558 
.01454 
.01747 
.01110 
.01212 
.01546 
.01619 
.01251 
.01471 
.02262 
.01502 
.01593 
.01533 
.01697 
.01060 
.01315 
.01538 
.01509 
.01303 
.01397 
.01513 
.01881 
.01398 
.01349 
.01768 
.01393 
.01503 
.01222 
.01266 
.01276 
.01372 
.01470 
.01593 
.01336 
.01803 
.01186 
.01857 
.01298 
.01593 
.01653 
.01755 
.01101 
.01629 
.01210 
.01633 
.01769 
.01534 
.01459 
.00948 
.01916 
.01347 
.01520 
.01414 
.01755 
.01096 
.01584 
.01383 
.01523 
.01521 
.01584 
.01596 
.01662 
.01*30 
.01318 
.01892 
.01624 
.01357 
.01256 

0.000816 
.000907 
.000772 
.000812 
.000818 
.000854 
.000873 
.000790 
.000807 
.000858 
.000899 
.000832 
.000980 
.001076 
.000834 
.000835 
.000894 
.001060 
.000814 
.000657 
.000853 
.001005 
.000866 
.000820 
.000888 
.001043 
.000820 
.000791 
.001038 
.000869 
.000939 
.000937 
.000789 
.000851 
.000914 
.000917 
.000836 
.000783 
.000900 
.000624 
.000975 
.000763 
.000937 
.000970 
.000975 
.000784 
.000902 
.000928 
.000859 
.000930 
.000805 
.000808 
.000787 
.000958 
.000839 
.000894 
.000785 
.000780 
.000781 
.000832 
.000920 
.000723 
.000845 
.000990 
.000887 
.000872 
.000714 
.000732 
.000900 
.000811 
.000848 
.000736 

263  

264  

265 

266  

269  

270 

271  

272  

273 

275  

276  ..  . 

278 

281  

282.  . 

295 

300  

301. 

305 

307  

310 

312... 

314  ... 

316 

317... 

321  .. 

323 

324  

325 

327... 

333  

336 

339... 

351  '.  . 

352 

353...-  

362 

366 

367  

368 

369  

370  ... 

372 

374  

375  .. 

377... 
379  

381 

382  

388  .. 

390... 

391  

399 

400  

401 

403  

404  

410 

411  

414 

416  

418 

423 

425  

426 

427 

429 

3.04 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
3.13- 
3.23 

431 

432  

433 

437  

442  

Average  . 

17.4     .4724 

.0270 

.0199 

1.3666 

3.23 

.01520  |   .000874 

SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERN 


TABLE  4. — Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content 

Crop  of  1902— Continued. 

3.5  TO  4  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


Record 
number. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels on 
row  of 
spikelets. 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Volume 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Specific 
gravity 
of  ker- 
nels. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

174 

18 
19 
19 
17 
20 
21 
15 
17 
12 
17 
19 
18 
16 
15 
18 
18 
17 
21 
19 
17 
15 
16 
16 
17 
14 
18 
17 
16 
16 
17 
17 
18 
17 
20 
17 
16 
14 
15 
18 
20 
19 
17 
16 
17 
19 
17 
23 
20 
17 

0.4025 
.4073 
.4972 
.5262 
.5512 
.5414 
.4015 
.3588 
.3318 
.4891 
.4976 
.4555 
.3984 
.3971 
.4562 
.4937 
.4617 
.5960 
.4932 
.5195 
.3347 
.4304 
.4305 
.4974 
.3723 
.5769 
.4140, 
.4740 
.3955 
.5037 
.4553 
.4753 
.4798 
.5795 
.3795 
.3469 
.4012 
.4162 
.4940 
.4707 
.4462 
.4329 
.3390 
.4393 
.4530 
.4156 
.5395 
.4310 
.4425 

0.0223 
.0214 
.0261 
.0309 
.0275 
.0257 
.0267 
.0211 
.0276 
.0287 
.0261 
.0253 
.0249 
.0264 
.0253 
.0274 
.0271 
.0283 
.0259 
.0305 
.0223 
.0269 
.0269 
.0292 
.0265 
.0320 
.0243 
.0296 
.0247 
.0296 
.0267 
.0239 
.0282 
.0289 
.0223 
.0216 
.0286 
.0277 
.0274 
.0235 
.0234 
.0254 
.0211 
.0258 
.0238 
.0244 
.0234 
.0215 
.0260 

3.76 
3.57 
3.85 
3.58 
3.78 
3.97 
3.90 
3.82 
3.79 
3.65 
3.55 
3.65 
3.53 
3.64 
3.75 
'3.50 
3.65 
3.63 
3.84 
3.50 
3.57 
3.79 
3.70 
3.86 
3.72 
3.87 
3.56 
3.87 
4.00 
3.94 
3.68 
3.75 
3.52 
3.61 
3.50 
3.50 
3.56 
3.79 
3.76 
3.79 
3.64 
3.59 
3.63 
3.77 
3.80 
3.73 
3.53- 
3.53 
3.75 

0.01513 
.01454 
.01914 
.01884 
.02084 
.02149 
-  .01566 
.01371 
.01258 
.01785 
.01766 
.01663 
.01406 
.01445 
.01711 
.01728 
.01685 
.02163 
.01894 
.01818 
.01195 
.01631 
.01593 
.01920 
.01385 
.02233 
.01474 
.01835 
.01582 
.01985 
.01676 
.01782 
.01689 
.02092 
.01328 
.01214 
.01428 
.01578 
.01857 
.01784 
.01624 
.01554 
.01231 
.01656 
.01721 
.01550 
.01904 
.01521 
.01659 

0.000838 
.000764 
.001005 
.001110 
.001040 
.001020 
.001043 
.000806 
.001046 
.001048 
.000927 
.000923 
.000879 
.000961 
.000949 
.000959 
.000991 
.001327 
.000995 
.001068 
.000796 
.001020 
.000995 
.001127 
.000986 
.001238 
.000865 
.001146 
.000988 
.001166 
.000983 
.000990 
.000993 
.001043 
.000781 
.000756 
.001020 
.001050 
.001030 
.000891 
.000852 
.000912 
.000766 
.000973 
.000904 
.000910 
.000826 
.000759 
.000975 

177.. 

179 

180... 

184. 

186 

204  

0.0198 
.0164 
.0205 
.0220 
.0193 
.0192 
.0177 
.0200 
.0194 
.0202 
.0193 
.0203 
.0193 
.0229 
.0168 
.0200 
.0198 
.0210 
.0189 
.0233 
.0178 
.0223 
.0177 
.0214 
.0195 
.0239 
.0202 
.0215 

.oies 

.0169 
.0212 
.0203 
.0203 
.0171 

1.3460 
1.2828 
.3493 
.3039 
.3507 
.3164 
.4025 
.3230 
.3058 
.3561 
.4095 
.3917 
.3400 
.3333 
.3300 
.3441 
.3600 
.3911 
.4050 
.3715 
.3660 
.3270 
.3921 
.3832 
.3715 
.1051 
.3971 
.3466 
.3499 
.2787 
.3499 
.3670 
.3508 
.3700 

209 

215... 

224  . 

as... 

235  

240 

245  

246  .. 

247... 
248.. 

253 

259... 

261.. 

274 

279  

280 

na 

284  

285 

286.. 

287 

290.. 

296 

299  

309  
313... 
328. 

363 

365... 

384 

385  

405  

407 

408... 

409  

412 

413  

417.. 

420 

422  

435. 

446 

Average  .  . 

17.3     .4517 

.0257 

.01987 

1.3494 

3.70 

.01672 

.000982 

Table  5  shows  at  a  glance  the  averages  for  each  of  the  classes  of 
spikes  just  tabulated,  and  permits  of  a  comparison  of  the  average 
figures  for  each  class/' 

«  The  determinations  of  specific  gravity  were  made  by  the  following  method,  devised  by 
Prof.  S.  Avery:  A  light  basket  of  wire  gauze  was  suspended  by  a  hair  from  the  hook  that 
supported  one  of  the  pan  hangers  of  the  balance.     The  basket  was  allowed  to  hang  in  a 
beaker  of  benzol  supported  by  a  shelf  above  the  pan.     By  using  a  counterpoise  the  balance 
was  now  brought  to  the  zero  point.     The  balance  was  kept  at  zero  by  the  occasional  adjust- 
ment of  a  rider  on  the  left  arm  of  the  beam.     The  wheat  was  weighed  on  the  pan  of  the 
balance,  then  transferred  to  the  basket  and  weighed  in  benzol,  and  the  temperature  of  the 
latter  carefully  noted.     The  specific  gravity  was  calculated  from  the  well-known  formula: 
Wt.  in  air  X  sp.  gr.  in  benzol  at  T°     g 
Wt.  in  air  —  wt.  in  benzol 


56 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  5. — Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  nitrogen  content 

of  kernels.     Crop  of  1902. 


Range  cf 
percentage  of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Per- 
centage 
of  pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 

Number  of  — 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Volume 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Specific 
gravity. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Analy- 
ses. 

Kernels 
on  row 
of  spike- 
lets. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

2  to  2  5 

2.32 
2.76 
3.23 
3.70 

18 
82 
107 
49 

17 
17.1 
17.4 
17.3 

0.4759 
.4791 
.4724 
.4715 

0.0266 
.0279 
.0270 
.0257 

0.0209 
.0207 
.0199 
.0199 

1.374 
1.368 
1.367 
1.349 

0.01141 
.01332 
.01520 
.01672 

0.000643 
.000776 
.000874 
.000982 

2.5  to  3  
3to3.5  
3  5  to  4 

From  this  table  it  will  be  seen  that  with  an  increase  in  the  percent- 
age of  proteid  nitrogen  the  number  of  kernels  on  a  row  of  spikelets 
remains  about  constant;  that  in  general  there  were  a  decrease  in  the 
weight  of  the  kernels  on  a  row  of  spikelets  and  a  slight  decrease  in  the 
weight  of  the  average  kernel ;  and  that  the  volume  of  the  average 
kernel  decreased,  as  did  the  specific  gravity. 

It  may  safely  be  stated  that  a  high  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen 
was  in  these  spikes  associated  with  a  kernel  of  low  specific  gravity, 
light  weight,  and  small  relative  volume,  and,  as  the  spikes  were 
selected  for  their  ripeness  and  healthy  appearance,  this  relation  can 
not  be  attributed  to  immaturity  or  disease.  • 

The  table  last  referred  to  shows  a  decrease  in  the  weight  of  the 
kernels  on  the  spike  as  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  increases; 
but  it  also  shows  that  in  spite  of  the  decrease  in  the  weight  of  the 
kernels  there  is  an  increase  in  the  actual  amount  of  proteid  nitrogen 
they  contain,  and  that  the  same  is  true  of  the  average  kernel. 

Table  6  gives  a  summary  of  the  same  analyses,  arranged  according 
to  the  specific  gravities  of  the  kernels.  All  spikes  whose  kernels  had 
a  specific  gravity  below  1.30  are  grouped  in  one  class,  those  having  a 
specific  gravity  of  1.30  to  1.33  in  another  class,  and  so  on  until  finally 
all  spikes  having  a  specific  gravity  of  more  than  1.42  form  the  last 
class. 

TABLE  6. — Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  specific  gravities 

of  kernels.     Crop  of  1902. 


Range  of  specific 
gravity. 

Specific 
gravity 
of  ker- 
nels. 

Number  of  — 

Weight 
of  kernels 
(gram). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Analy- 
ses. 

Kernels. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Below  1.30... 
1.30tol  33  

1.255 
1.315 
1.347 
1.375 
1.399 
1.463 

8 
17 
50 
71 
40 
8 

16.7 
16.5 
17.3 
17.2 
16.7 
19.1 

0.3887 
.4315 
.4008 
.4794 

.4848 
.5287 

3.29 
3.35 
2.91 
3.06 
3.03 
3.07 

0.02331 
.02617 
.02366 
.  02786 
.  02899 
.02773 

0.  01280 
.01446 
.01508 
.01462 
.01459 
.01605 

0.  0007662 
.  0008762 
.  0008756 
.  0008559 
.  0008729 
.  0008371 

1  33  to  1  36 

1.36  to  1.39  

1  39  to  1  42        

1  42  and  over 

SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


57 


This  table  shows  no  constant  relation  between  the  specific  gravity 
and  the  number  of  kernels  on  the  spike.  With  an  increase  in  the 
specific  gravity  there  is  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the  kernels  on  the 
spike,  and  with  some  exceptions  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the 
average  kernel.  As  the  specific  gravity  increases,  the  percentage  of 
proteid  nitrogen  decreases,  which  agrees  with  the  previous  table. 
The  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  kernels  on  the  spikes  and  in  the 
average  kernel  increase  with  the  specific  gravity. 

Table  7  shows  the  summary  of  the  same  analyses,  arranged  accord- 
ing to  the  weight  of  the  average  kernel.  Spikes  whose  kernels  have 
an  average  weight  of  less  than  0.024  gram  form  the  first  class,  and 
each  succeeding  class  increases  by  0.002  gram. 

TABLE  7. — Summary  of  analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average 

kernel.    Crop  of  1902. 


Range  of  weight  of 

Weight 
of  aver- 

Number of  — 

Weight      Specific 

Percent- 
age of 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

average  kernel 
(gram). 

age  ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

AJ£fy-   Kernels. 

nels         of  ker- 
(gram).       nels. 

i 

nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Average       Tr«_,  1 
kernel.       kernels. 

Below  0.024 

0.02214 

27             16.9 

0.3812           1.341 

3.197 

0.0007184         0  01215 

0  024  to  0  026 

02528 

38             17  5 

4425           1  361 

3  28 

0008294             01438 

0.026  to  0.028  
0  028  to  0.030 

.02705 
.02896 

48             17.0 
40             17.  0 

.4609           1.360 
.4916  l        1.372 

3.22 
3  11 

.0008711           .01475 
.0009090  ;          01546 

0.030  to  0.032  

.03089 

26             17.0 

.5274           1.388 

2.86 

.0008787  ;        .01506 

0.032  and  over 

.03324 

19             16.8 

.5588     '      1.373 

2.88 

.0009594  1        .01617 

j 

There  seems  to  be  no  relation  between  the  weight  of  the  average 
kernel  and  the  number  of  kernels  on  the  spike.  The  weight  of  all 
the  kernels  on  the  spike  naturally  increases  with  the  weight  of  the 
average  kernel.  The  specific  gravity  of  the  kernels  increases  with 
the  weight  of  the  average  kernel.  The  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen 
decreases  with  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the  average  kernel,  in 
which  respect  it  agrees  with  the  two  previous  tables.  The  grams  of 
proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel  and  the  total  proteid  nitrogen 
in  the  spike  increase  with  the  weight  of  the  average  kernel. 

Samples  from  each  of  the  spikes  of  wheat  from  which  these  data 
were  derived  were  planted,  together  with  samples  from  other  spikes, 
all  of  which  have  been  analyzed,  aggregating  800  in  all.  Each  kernel 
was  planted  separately  at  a  distance  of  6  inches  each  way  from  every 
other  kernel.  The  kernels  from  each  spike  were  marked  by  a  stake 
bearing  the  record  number  of  the  spike. 

During  the  winter  a  considerable  number  of  plants  were  killed,  so 
that  the  stand  was  irregular  in  the  spring.  In  some  cases  all  of  the 
plants  resulting  from  a  spike  of  the  previous  year  were  killed,  and  in 
other  cases  only  a  portion  of  such  plants.  The  result  was  a  some- 
what uneven  stand,  which  doubtless  gave  certain  plants  an  advantage 
over  others  in  growth  and  yield. 


58  IMPBOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

When  the  crop  was  ripe  in  1903  each  plant  was  harvested  sepa- 
rately, and  all  of  those  resulting  from  spikes  which  the  previous  year 
had  shown  a  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  more  than  4  per  cent  or  less 
than  2  per  cent  were  analyzed,  as  were  also  a  certain  number  resulting 
from  spikes  of  intermediate  values. 

The  good  kernels  on  each  plant  were  counted  and  weighed,  thus 
giving  a  record  of  the  yield  of  each  plant.  From  these  data  the 
average  weight  of  the  kernels  per  plant  was  calculated.  The  specific 
gravity  was  not  determined  and  consequently  the  average  volume  of 
the  kernels  on  each  plant  was  not  calculated,  as  was  done  the  previous 
year. 

In  Table  8  the  plants  harvested  in  1903  are  arranged  in  classes  of 
1  to  2  per  cent  proteid  nitrogen,  2  to  2.5  per  cent,  2.5  to  3  per  cent, 
3  to  3.5  per  cent,  3.5  to  4  per  cent,  4  to  4.5  per  cent,  and  over  4.5  per 
cent.  The  number  and  weight  of  the  kernels  on  each  plant  are  stated, 
as  is  also  the  average  weight  of  each  kernel.  The  number  of  grams 
of  proteid  nitrogen  in  all  the  kernels  of  the  plant  is  shown,  and  also 
the  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel  on  each 
plant.  Table  9  shows  the  average  for  each  class. 

These  results,  so  far  as  they  cover  the  same  ground  as  those  of  the 
previous  year,  have  the  same  significance.  They  show  a  quite  uniform 
although  slight  decrease  in  the  weight  of  the  average  kernel  accom- 
panying an  increase  in  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen,  and  a  very 
marked  increase  in  the  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the 
average  kernel.  Especially  marked  is  the  increase  in  the  amount  of 
proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel,  amounting  to  28  per  cent  of 
the  weight  of  the  kernel  for  every  1  per  cent  increase  in  the  content 
of  proteid  nitrogen. 

One  column  of  this  table,  not  contained  in  that  compiled  from 
results  of  the  previous  year,  shows  the  number  of  grams  of  proteid 
nitrogen  contained  in  all  of  the  kernels  on  the  plant;  or,  in  other 
words,  the  proteid  nitrogen  production  of  the  plant.  This  appears, 
on  the  whole,  to  increase  with  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen, 
although  the  results  are  not  sufficiently  consistent  to  permit  of  an 
unqualified  statement  to  that  effect.  The  uneven  stand  of  the  plants, 
before  referred  to,  doubtless  accounts  for  these  inconsistent  results. 

Two  other  columns  contain  data  not  obtained  in  1902.  The  first 
of  these  shows  the  number  of  kernels  per  plant,  which  apparently 
decreases  slightly  as  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  increases,  but 
this  can  not  be  stated  unqualifiedly.  The  next  column  shows  the 
weight  of  kernels  per  plant,  or  the  yield  per  plant,  which  likewise 
seems  to  decrease  slightly  with  an  increase  in  the  percentage  of  pro- 
teid nitrogen. 


SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


59 


TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.     Crop  of 

1903. 

1  TO  2  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Pe™"}-    Number 
P-te°id      n°efls% 

ffSSZ;  PI- 

Weight  (in  grams)  of  — 

Total  pro-        Proteid 
teid  intro-     nitrogen  in 
gen  in  all     average  ker- 
kernels               nel 
(gram).          (grain). 

Kernels        Average 
per  plant.        kernel. 

.32206 

.81 
.20 
.62 
.39 
.61 
.46 
.91 
.84 
.50 
.34 
.89 
.69 
.98 
.73 
.88 
.87 
.90 
.66 
.89 
.98 
.81 
.98 
.92 
.66 
.65 
.95 
.96 
.81 

507 
225 
305 
77 
508 
25 
220 
124 
718 
862 
342 
577 
41 
736 
95 
35 
208 
558 
543 
216 
729 
465 
396 
53 
64 
56 
125 
159 

10.4036 
5.2268 
7.0889 
1.1132 
11.1476 
.3161 
4.0358 
1.5298 
11.2890 
15.5935 
5.6864 
9.8378 
.8328 
16.4433 
1.9469 
.5952 
4.0230 
12.0136 
9.3629 
4.4222 
15.7835 
9.7922 
9.1411 
.8983 
1.2117 
.7319 
2.3678 
2.8356 

0.02052 
.02323 
.02271 
.01446 
.02194 
.01264 
.01834 
.01234 
.01572 
.01804 
.01663 
.01705 
.02031 
.02234 
.02049 
.01701 
.01934 
.02153 
.01724 
.02047 
.02165 
.02106 
.02308 
.01695 
.01893 
.01307 
.01894 
.01783 

0.18831 
.06272 
.11223 
.01.547 
.17948 
.00462 
.07708 
.02815 
.16933 
.20881 
.  10747 
.16626 
.01649 
.24847 
.03660 
.01113 
•      .07644 
.19943 
.18538 
.08756 
.28569 
.19388 
.17550 
.01491 
.01999 
.01427 
.04641 
.05132 

0.0003714 
.0002788 
.0003679 
.0002009 
.0003533 
.0001846 
.0003504 
.0002700 
.0002358 
.0002422 
.0003142 
.0002881 
.0004022 
.0003865 
.0003853 
.0003180 
.0003674 
.0003574 
.0003414 
.0004054 
.0003919 
.0004170 
.0004432 
.0002814 
.0003124 
.0002549 
.0003713 
.0003228 

32605  
33407 

33408 

33905  
42206 

45606  

45805  
48407  
51005  

55307 

57308  

57405  . 

57607 

58806  

60605 

63505  

69806  
72606 

74305  

80305  
81705 

81710  
92407 

94205  

94605  
94908 

95510  

Average  .  . 

1.749           320.3           6.23823  I         .01871             .10655 

!                   i                       1 

.00032914 

2  TO  25  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17405... 

2.13 

738 

15.6996 

0.02127 

0.33441 

0.0004531 

17408  
18805 

2.18 
2.02 

497 
137 

9.2038 
2.1462 

.01852 
.01567 

.20065 
.04335 

.0004037 
.0003164 

21212  

2.16 

84 

1.7216 

.02050 

.03718 

.0004427 

21705  
21707 

2.45 
2.19 

58 
582 

1.5420 
12.3685 

.02659 
•  .02125 

.03778 
.27086 

.0006514 
.0004654 

21708  

2.33 

390 

9.2850 

.02381 

.21634 

.0005547 

21709  .  .  . 

2.47 

361 

7.7296 

.02141 

.19092 

.0005289 

21912 

2.31 

510 

9.7236 

.01907 

.22461 

0004404 

27205  

2.41 

891 

16.4061 

.01841 

.39539 

.0004437 

27206 

2.36 

19.1854 

.02469 

.  45276 

.0005827 

27306  

2.47 

684 

13.3011 

.01945 

.32853 

.0004803 

27505  
33107 

2.12 
2.35 

539 
318 

12.0399 
6.1026 

.02183 
.01919 

.  24942 
.  14341 

.0004627 
.0004510 

33405  

2.03 

421 

8.1268 

.01930 

.16498 

.0003919 

33605 

2.39 

301 

7.0596 

.02345 

.16872 

.0005605 

33606  

2.21 

382 

8.1890 

.02144 

.18098 

.0004738 

34208  
37706 

2.13 
2.34 

156 
56 

2.9886 
1.2069 

.01916 
.02155 

.06366 
.02824 

.0004081 
.0005053 

37906  

2.44 

19 

.2063 

.01086 

.00503 

.0002649 

39205  
39606 

2.11 
2  37 

1,031 
346 

21.5399 
4  6383 

.02089 
.01341 

.45435 
.10967 

.0004407 
0003177 

44607  
48106 

2.44 
2.38 

101 

608 

1.8246 
11.6655 

.01806 
.01919 

.04452 
.27765 

.0004408 
.0004567 

48409  

2.02 

314 

*   6.4302 

.02048 

.12989 

•  .0004137 

05305  
55306... 

2.48 
2.18 

167 
214 

2.5160 
4.1323 

.01507 
.01931 

.06240 
.09008 

.0003736 
.0004210 

55608  

2.31 

837 

22.5848 

.02699 

.52194 

.0006236 

55908 

2.42 

562 

12.2210 

.02175 

.  29575 

.0005262 

",'.MC.  .. 

2.30 

302 

9.2120 

.03050 

.21187 

.0007016 

,56206  

2.42 

509 

9.3093 

.01829 

.22529 

.0004426 

58207 

2.34 

462 

10.  9073 

.02361 

.25522 

.0005524 

57307 

2  43 

261 

4  7117 

01801 

.11445 

.0004387 

57508  

2.21 

380 

12.  0728 

.03177 

.26680 

.0007021 

58905  
59605 

2.43 
2  12 

170 
382 

2.3031 
7  1828 

.01355 
.01880 

.05596 
.15228 

.0003292 
.0003986 

seeoe... 

2.16 

567 

9.7084 

.01712 

.20970 

.0003698 

63107  

2.43 

417 

9.3120 

.02233 

.22628 

.0005426 

60 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


.TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.     Crop 

of  1903— Continued. 

2  TO  2.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN— Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  kernels. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels per 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Total  pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in  all 
kernels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen  in 
average  ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Kernels 
per  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

63506... 

2.44 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2.29 
2.47 
2.13 
2,27 
2.48 
2.45 
2.39 
2.30 
2.35 
2.34 
2.41 
2.28 
2.48 
2.32 
2.47 
2.42 
2.30 
2.49 
2.47 
2.07 
2.35 
2.48 
2.47 

153 
544 
373 
583 
225 
1,260 
372 
398 
167 
414 
25 
464 
498 
786 
287 
757 
428 
37 
74 
470 
315 
190 
549 
419 
286 
138 
52 

2.  3986 
9.8298 
7.0051 
11.7066 
4.7116 
28.  2136 
9.  1522 
9.  0386 
2.  6462 
8.5373 
.5572 
9.6451 
8.  4407 
18.3614 
7.  3993 
16.  4692 
8.  7448 
.7130 
1.5355 
9.8719 
5.7131 
3.6006 
10.  5556 
6.  7664 
4.  4423 
2.  9475 
.7577 

.01568 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.01847 
.02239 
.02191 
.02270 
.01585 
.02062 
.02229 
.02079 
.01695 
.02336 
.02578 
.  02175 
.02043 
.01927 
.02075 
.02100 
.01814 
.01895 
.  01923 
.01615 
.01553 
.02136 
.01457 

0.05853 
.23690 
.  15971 
.  24468 
.10790 
.69688 
.  19936 
.  20518 
.06563 
.20918 
.01332 
.  22184 
.19836 
.42965 
.17833 
.37548 
.21687 
.  01654 
.  03793 
.23890 
.  13140 
.08965 
.26073 
.  14007 
.  10439 
.07310 
.01872 

0.0003825 
.0004355 
.0004282 
.  0004197 
.0004231 
.0005531 
.  0004668 
.0005154 
.  0003930 
.  0005052 
.  0005327 
.0004781 
.0003983 
.  0005466 
.0006213 
.0004960 
.0005067 
.  0004471 
.0005125 
.0005082 
.0004171 
.  0004719 
.  0004749 
.  0003343 
.0003650 
.  0005297 
.0003599 

65306  
65307 

65308  

69505  
71905 

72705  

72708  
72905 

73306  

73307  
74606 

76205  

81707  
81708 

81709  

84405  
84905 

88608 

88609 

92409 

94209  

94406 

94407  
94905  

95509 

95707 

.   Average  

2.319 

396.8 

8.2502 

.020113 

.190316    ;        .0004660 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17409 

2.75 

802 

14.  8957 

0.01857 

0.  40964 

0.  0005108 

17410  

2.88 

744 

16.9987 

.02285 

.  48957 

.  0006580 

20706 

2.78 

163 

3.  3138 

.02033 

.09212 

.  0005652 

20707 

2.77 

444 

9  9070 

.  02282 

.  27443 

.0006181 

20708  

2.58 

122 

2.4690 

.  02024 

.  06399 

.  0005221 

20710 

2.83 

867 

17.1115 

.01974 

.  48428 

.  0005586 

21207 

2.96 

118 

2  3066 

.  01955 

.06804 

0005766 

21305  

2.67 

312 

6.2514 

.02004 

.  16691 

.0005350 

21306 

O  QQ 

226 

4.  1516 

.01837 

.  12039 

.  0005327 

21710... 
21711  

2.59 
2.71 

59 
873 

.8478 
17.  1820 

.  01437 
.  01968 

.02196 
.  46563 

.  0003722 
.  0005334 

21805 

2.69 

1,232 

20.  9290 

.  01699 

.56299 

.  0004569 

21806  
21807  
21808 

2.71 
2.73 
2.57 

599 
377 
1,156 

14.  2450 
9.4172 
19.  7446 

.  02378 
.02498 
.01708 

.38604 
.  25709 
.50744 

.  0006444 
.0006664 
.  0004389 

21809  

2.73 

418 

8.0214 

.01919 

.21898 

.  0005238 

21810  
21905 

2.69 
2.64 

52 
791 

1.0304 
14.3111 

.01982 
.01809 

.02772 

.  37781 

.0005330 
.  0004777 

22205  

2.81 

283 

2.6965 

.00953 

.  07577 

.  0002677 

22207  
25205 

2.77 
2.71 

169 
522 

3.  2787 
10.  7836 

.01940 
.  02066 

.09082 
.  28560 

.0005374 
0005599 

25206.  .  . 
26106  
26805 

2.76 
2.63 
2.81 

205 
90 
220 

4.  67.54 
2.  0737 
4  9456 

.02281 
.  02304 
.  02248 

.12904 
.  05454 
.  13897 

.0006295 
.0006060 
0006317 

26806.  .  . 

2.60 

152 

2.  7255 

.01793 

.  07086 

.  0004662 

26807  
26905  
26906  
26907  
26908 

2.80 
2.76 
2.71 
2.61 
2.96 

721 

326 
228 
102 
192 

17.  2324 
6.  4102 
4.  2376 
1.8276 
3  9797 

•  .02390 
.01966 
.01859 
.01792 
02073 

.48250 
.17692 
.11484 
.  04995 
11780 

.0006692 
.0005427 
.0005037 
.0004677 
0006135 

26909  
27005  
27207 

2.80 
2.63 
2.92 

180 
866 
166 

2.9999 
16.4120 
3.3266 

.01667 
.  01895 
02004 

.08400 
.  43164 

00712 

.0004667 
.0004984 
0005850 

27305  

2.58 

267 

5.  5666 

.  02085 

.  14362 

.  0005379 

27307  
27506 

2.53 
2.70 

167 
444 

3.0850 
10.  0005 

.01847 
.  02252 

.07805 
27003 

.  0004674 
0006082 

27508  

2.64 

251 

5.  5324 

.02287 

.14608 

.0006037 

27o09  
28805 

2.90 
2.91 

243 

87 

5.3615 
2.  1851 

.02206 
.02512 

.  15549 
06359 

.0006399 
.  0007309 

32606  

2.88 

94 

2.0162 

.02145 

.  05807 

.0006177 

SOME    PKOPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


61 


TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.    Crop 

of  1903— Continued. 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN-Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  kernels. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels per 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Total  pro-   Proteid 
teid  nitro-  nitrogen  in 
gen  in  all  average  ker- 
kernels      nel 
(gram).    (pram). 

Kernels 
per  plant 

Average 
kernel 

33105 

2.91 
2.94 
2.87 
2.81 
2.73 
2.84 
2.96 
2.64 
2.94 
2.53 
2.84 
2.89 
2.63 
2.82 
2.74 
2.59 
2.88 
2.93 
2.82 
2.92 
2.94 
2.86 
2.90 
2.82 
2.54 
2.54 
2.87 
2.81 
2.64 
2.76 
2.70 
2.80 
2.60 
2.56 
2.54 
2.80 
2.63 
2.64 
2.58 
2.69 
2.67 
2.81 
2.59 
2.73 
2.57 
2.96 
2.51 
2.61 
2.59 
2.71 
2.76 
2.65 
2.76 
2.86 
2.75 
2.62 
2.61 
2.80 
2.85 
2.54 
2.74 
2.64 
2.87 
2.67 
2.95 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.50 
2.50 
2.95 
2.93 
2.73 
2.60 
2.60 

132 
18 
283 
119 
464 
611 
309 
461 
193 
37 
139 
85 
401 
158 
293 
365 
447 
67 
170 
124 
340 
55 
124 
61 
82 
478 
473 
27 
70 
603 
547 
35 
944 
578 
397 
866 
504 
500 
503 
138 
331 
499 
749 
336 
644 
872 
333 
563 
950 
88 
701 
168 
407 
434 
135 
762 
596 
180 

359 

611 
132 
438 
270 
148 
273 
1,158 
165 
370 
663 
244 
430 
624 
23 

n 

399 

2.5601 
.3089 
4.6045 
2.2862 
9.  1498 
13.5556 
6.1394 
8.0905 
3.3004 
.9452 
2.5134 
1.6799 
8.4605 
3.0228 
6.7665 
7.2545 
9.3541 
1.9218 
4.1546 
2.8000 
5.9990 
1.1271 
2.5235 
.7081 
1.6103 
8.3935 
12.0278 
.3485 
1.6036 
11.2008 
9.8346 
.4701 
17.4226 
11.3592 
9.5078 
17.8506 
9.8228 
10.9180 
11.0930 
2.  3931 
5.7948 
7.9968 
19.3966 
5.7431 
12.0161 
14.4556 
6.5232 
13.5720 
15.8086 
1.5364 
10.  1836 
3.3176 
3.7263 
7.9772 
2.4923 
14.9992 
12.2004 
2.  7616 
6.9861 
10.6261 
3.0790 
8.6189 
.  4.8988 
1.3961 
7.4516 
23.  1471 
3.3006 
7.6690 
13.5696 
3.  7810 
8.2929 
14.2986 
.4096 
.8172 
7.1181 

0.01939 
.01716 
.01627 
.01921 
.01972 
..02219 
.01987 
.01972 
.01710 
.02555 
.01808 
.01975 
.02110 
.01913 
.02309 
.01988 
.02093 
.02869 
.02444 
.02258 
.01764 
.02049 
.02035 
.01161 
.01964 
.017.56 
.02543 
.01291 
.02296 
.01858 
.01798 
.01343 
.01846 
.01965 
.02395 
.02062 
.01949 
.02184 
.02205 
.01734 
.01751 
.01603 
.02590 
.01709 
.01866 
.01658 
.01959 
.02356 
.01664 
.01746 
.01453 
.01975 
.00916 
.01838 
.01846 
.01968 
.02047 
.01534 
.01946 
.01739 
.02333 
.01968 
.01814 
.00943 
.02730 
.01999 
.02001 
.02073 
.02047 
.01550 
.01929 
.02291 
.01781 
.01434 
.01784 

0.07450 
.00908 
.13215 
.06424 
.24979 
.38505 
.  18173 
.23998 
.09670 
.02391- 
.07138 
.04855 
.22251 
.08522 
.18540 
.18789 
'  .21399 
.05631 
.11716 
.08176 
.17637 
.03223 
.07318 
.01997 
.04090 
.21319 
.34524 
.00979 
.04233 
.30986 
.26553 
.01316 
.45299 
.29079 
.241.50 
.49995 
.25834 
.28823 
.28580 
.06437 
.  15470 
.22471 
.50238 
.  15679 
.30881 
.42790 
.  16373 
.34616 
.40945 
.04164 
.28107 
.08792 
.10285 
.22815 
.06854 
.39297 
.31842 
.07733 
.19905 
.26990 
.08436 
.22756 
.14060 
.03728 
.  21982 
.63422 
.09208 
.20170 
.33923 
.09453 
.24464 
.41752 
.01118 
.02125 
.18507 

0.0005644 
.0005045 
.0004670 
.000.5399 
.0005383 
.0006273 
.0005881 
.0005327 
.0005010 
.0006463 
.0005135 
.0005712 
.0005.549 
.0005394 
.0006475 
.0005148 
.0006027 
.0008404 
.0006892 
.0006594 
.0005187 
.0005861 
.0005902 
.0003273 
.0004988 
.0004460 
.0007299 
.0003627 
.0006062 
.0005127 
.0004877 
.0003761 
.0004799 
.000.5031 
.0006225 
.0005773 
.0005126 
.0005765 
.0005690 
.0004665 
.0004674 
.0004503 
.0006707 
.0004667 
.0004795 
.0004907 
.0004917 
.0006149 
.0004310 
.0004731 
.0004010 
.0005233 
.0002527 
.0005257 
.0005077 
.0005157 
.0005343 
.0004296 
.0005545 
.0004417 
.0006391 
.0005195 
.0005207 
.0002519 
.0008052 
.0005464 
.0005581 
.0005451 
.0005117 
.0003874 
.0005689 
.0006539 
.0004862 
.0003728 
.0004638 

33106  

33406 

33906  
34205  
34207 

37305  

37705  
37707  
37905  
38005 

38506  

38606 

38608  

38609  . 

38706... 
39405  
39506 

40505  

43405 

44505 

44605  

44606 

45605  

46106  

46107 

48305  

48408 

48507  

48508 

48806  

50706  . 

55008  

55206  

55308 

55506  

55507 

55605  

55606  
55607 

55905  

55906. 

55907 

56105  

56106 

56107  

56205. 

56206 

56209  

57005 

57006  

57007  
57105... 
57306  

57406 

57407  

57408 

57506 

57507  

57509 

57606... 

57608.. 

57805 

58206  

58505 

58806... 

63106..   .  . 

66005 

K9506... 

69705  

72406 

73306 

74506  

74508 

74605 

62 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.    Crop  of 

1903— Continued. 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN-Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  kernels. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels per 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Total  pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in  all 
kernels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen  in 
average  ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Kernels 
per  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

74607... 
81405 

2.56 
2.62 
2.94 
2.71 
2.60 
2.66 
2.56 
2.63 
2.80 
2.53 
2.61 
2.83 
2.65 
2.81 
2.74 
2.67 
2.55 
2.72 
2.93 
2.97 
2.58 
2.78 
2.86 
2.94 
2.81 
2.74 
2.59 
2.56 
2.54 
2.73 

491 
240 
146 
722 
214 
376 
203 
436 
69 
481 
234 
293 
546 
200 
345 
46 
209 
353 
160 
207 
505 
402 
718 
626 
37 
597 
571 
740 
636 
267 

8.3406 
4.5737 
2.8327 
15.3928 
3.4766 
4.9315 
3.0282 
7.6241 
1.6362 
9.9456 
5.1584 
5.3069 
9.9034 
3.5486 
5.2616 
1.  1074 
3.  6926 
6.6206 
2.3859 
3.7820 
9.  6779 
7.5006 
13.  7057 
12.  1918 
.3146 
11.0548 
12.  1592 
14.4617 
10.  3426 
5.1629 

0.  01699 
.01862 
.01940 
.02132 
.0162,') 
.01312 
.01495 
.01749 
.02731 
.02068 
.02205 
.01811 
.01814 
.01774 
.01525 
.02407 
.  01767 
.01876 
.01491 
.01827 
.01916 
.01866 
.01909 
.01948 
.00850 
.01852 
.02030 
.01954 
.01626 
.01934 

0.21352 
.11710 
.08328 
.41715 
.09039 
.  13118 
.07964 
.20052 
.04581 
.25162 
.13463 
.  15019 
.26245 
.09972 
.  14417 
.02957 
.09416 
.18008 
.06991 
.11233 
.24969 
.20851 
.39199 
.35844 
.00884 
.30291 
.31492 
.37023 
.26270 
.14095 

0.0004349 
.0004879 
.0005704 
.0005778 
.0004224 
.0003332 
.0003923 
.0004599 
.0007640 
.0005231 
.0005754 
.0005126 
.0004807 
.0004986 
.0004179 
.0006428 
.0004505 
.0005102 
.0004369 
.0005426 
.0004944 
.0005187 
.0005460 
.0005726 
.0002389 
.  0005074 
.0005515 
.0005003 
.0004131 
.0005279 

81605  

81706 

85205 

85206  

86105 

86106... 

88605  . 

88606 

88607... 

88905 

88906... 

91906  .   . 

92205 

92206  

92207 

92208 

92305  

92408 

92507  

94206  
94207 

94907  

95505 

95506 

95507  
95508 

95705  

95706  

Average  

2.731 

370.  36 

7.  1755 

.019354           .194423 

.00052706 

TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17305 

3.03 

183 

3  6302 

0  01984 

0  10999 

0  0006010 

17306.  .  . 

3.09 

243 

3.9968 

.01645 

.12350 

.  0005082 

17307..  .  . 

3.46 

138 

3  1454 

02280 

10883 

0007886 

17308 

3.25 

61 

1  2275 

02012 

03994 

0006540 

17406  

3.29 

124 

2.0907 

.0168i 

06878 

0005547 

18906 

3.48 

65 

9229 

01420 

03212 

0004941 

20705... 
20709  

3.09 
3.05 

109 
258 

1.8517 
5  3229 

.01698 
02063 

.05722 
15935 

.0005249 
0006992 

20805 

3.32 

697 

14  6942 

02157 

48784 

0006999 

21205  

3.16 

123 

2.  3642 

.  01922 

07471 

0006074 

21208  
21211 

3.24 
3  15 

287 
10 

5.  1594 
2806 

.01798 
02806 

.  16712 
00884 

.0005824 
0008839 

21307  
21308 

3.04 
3.45 

143 
354 

2.  5691 
5  8080 

.01796 
01641 

.07810 
20038 

.0005461 
0005660 

21906  

3.18 

408 

10.  4800 

.02563 

33403 

0008168 

21907  

3.35 

158 

2.9248 

01851 

09^98 

0006201 

21913 

3.01 

492 

10  1925 

02072 

30680 

0006235 

22206  

3.22 

146 

2.5712 

.01720 

08086 

0005538 

22208  . 

3.18 

118 

1.9090 

01619 

06071 

0005144 

22210... 

3.17 

298 

6.0173 

.02019 

.19075 

0006401 

22211  . 

3.17 

561 

11.5675 

.02062 

36671 

0006537 

26105 

3.02 

131 

1.8242 

01393 

05508 

0003fi62 

26808  

3.09 

222 

3.8811 

.  01748 

.11992 

0005402 

27507  

3.08 

75 

1.3746 

.01833 

04234 

0005646 

28206... 
28806  

3.07 
3.02 

219 

685 

4.3698 
14.4630  . 

.01996 
.02111 

.13415 
.  43679 

.0006126 
0006376 

32207 

3.48 

69 

1.25'T3 

.01822 

04375 

0006341 

33305... 

3.41 

150 

3.13^6 

.02090 

.  10689 

.0007126 

33607  

3.22 

136 

2.8903 

.02125 

.09307 

0006843 

34606 

3.12 

280 

6.1962 

02213 

19332 

0006904 

39507  

3.02 

111 

1.8862 

.01699 

.05696 

0005132 

40305 

3.11 

179 

3.6003 

.02011 

11197 

0006255 

40405... 
42405  
42905 

3.17 
3.07 
3.17 

46 
66 
67 

.6316 
1.4892 
1.2499 

.01373 
.02251 
.01866 

.02002 
.04572 
03650 

.0004352 
.0006927 
0005447 

46105  

3.00 

260 

4.6146 

.01775 

.13843 

.0005324 

48306  

3.29 

157 

2.  6571 

.01692 

.08742 

.0005568 

SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


63 


TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.    Crop  of 

1903— Continued. 

3  TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN— Continued. 


Percent- 
Recordnum-     parftefd 
nitrogen 
in  kernels. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels per 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Total  pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in  all 
kernels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen  in 
average  ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Kernels 
per  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

48405 

3.31 
3.20 
3.13 
3.00 
3.24 
3.30 
3.05 
3.16 
3.10 
3.11 
3.19 
3.18 
3.09 
3.01 
3.25 
3.24 
3.36 
3.49 
3.01 
3.02 
3.31 
3.43 
3.21 
3.36 
3.10 
3.11 
3.00 
3.10 
3.41 

76 
556 
264 
379 
67 
221 
393 
451 
40 
216 
501 
221 
307 
235 
111 
90 
213 
225 
110 
493 
72 
382 
138 
198 
214 
380 
156 
322 
685 

0.9701 
9.4585 
4.3615 
6.1986 
1.2716 
2.3982 
7.9684 
7.1852 
.6893 
3.7407 
8.  5777 
2.4731 
4.2207 
2.5436 
1.3451 
1.5452 
8.4415 
4.5806 
2.0970 
9.2130 
1.2391 
7.5438 
3.0940 
3.4436 
3.4356 
8.2366 
2.6615 
3.7828 
12.3862 

0.01276 
.01701 
.01652 
.01635 
.01898 
.01085 
.02028 
.01593 
.01723 
.01732 
.01666 
.01118 
.01375 
.01082 
.01212 
.01717 
.03963 
.02036 
.01906 
.01869 
.01721 
.01975 
.02242 
.01739 
.01605 
.02168 
.01706 
.01175 
.01808 

0.03211 
.30267 
.13652 
.18596 
.04120 
.07914 
.24304 
.22705 
.02137 
.11636 
.29188 
.07859 
.13042 
.07656 
.04272 
.05007 
,28363 
.15986 
.06312 
.27823 
.04101 
.25873 
.09932 
.  11570 
.10650 
.25616 
.07985 
.  11727 
.42236 

0.0004225 
.0005444 
.0005171 
.0004906 
.0006149 
.0003581 
.0006185 
.0005034 
.0005342 
.0005386 
.0005326 
.0003556 
.      .(XXH248 
.0003256 
.0003938 
.0005563 
.0013316 
.0007105 
.0005738 
.0005644 
.0005697 
.0006773 
.0007197 
.0005844 
.0004977 
.0006741 
.0005118 
.0003642 
.0006166 

48506  
48705 

48706  
49505 

50905  
55005  

55006 

55205  

55508 

57305 

57905  

58207 

58705  .'. 

62805  
63105  

72405  

72707 

72806  

74507 

81406  

84906  
91305 

91905  

92405 

92406  

92505  .... 

94208  
94906  

Average  

3.184          235.5 

4.38558           .018366 

.139656           .000.58156 

3.5  TO  4  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17506 

3.52 

93 

2.2881 

0.02460 

0.08044 

0.0008660 

17507  

3.80 

43 

.7220 

.01795 

.02933 

.0006822 

18905  .... 

3.81 

103 

1.4864 

.01443 

.05663 

.0005498 

21209 

3.61 

89 

1.4484 

.01627 

.05228 

.0005875 

21811  

3.75 

567 

11.9114 

.02101 

.44666 

.0007877 

21908  
22209 

3.82 
3.84 

173 
31 

3.5574 
.4336 

.02056 
.01399 

.13589 
.01665 

.0007855 
.0005371 

26107  

3.92 

144 

2.0390 

.01416 

.07993 

.0005551 

32608 

3.78 

55 

1.0183 

.01851 

.03849 

.0006998 

34206  

3.73 

81 

1.5940 

.01968 

.05946 

.0007340 

36905 

3.88 

267 

5.0200 

.01880 

.19478 

.0007295 

38505 

3.61 

563 

12.1088 

.02252 

.43713 

.0007764 

42205  

3.63 

94 

1.8494 

.01967 

.06713 

.0007142 

45005 

3.58 

235 

3.2340 

.01376 

.11575 

.0004927 

48505  

3.66 

137 

1.9154 

.01398 

.07010 

.0005117 

49905 

3.62 

23 

.6760 

.02939 

.02436 

.0010640 

50705 

3.54 

30 

.5958 

.01986 

.02109 

.0007032 

50906  

3.57 

114 

1.7280 

.01516 

.06169 

.0005411 

66006 

3.54 

366 

6.0090 

.01642 

.21272 

.0005812 

66008  

3.59 

174 

3.1555 

.01814 

.11328 

.0006510 

72706 

3.86 

591 

14.6802 

.02484 

.56666 

.0009588 

94909  

Z.W 

218 

3.6977 

.01696 

.  13312 

.0006106 

Average  

3.69 

190.5 

3.68947 

.018666 

.13698 

.00068723 

(54 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  8. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.     Crop 

of  1903— Continued. 


4  TO  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  kernels. 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels per 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Kernels 
per  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

21812 

4.26 
4.04 
4.43 
4.15 
4.33 
4.13 
4.18 
4.21 
4.42 
4.45 
4.39 

983 
216 
525 
254 
207 
93 
44 
118 
103 
447 
229 

14.  8139 
4.0258 
12.  1819 
4.5123 
4.  1281 
1.4464 
.7532 
2.  1571 
2.0430 
5.4411 
3.8709 

0.01507 
.01877 
.02317 
.01777 
.01994 
.01555 
.01712 
.01828 
.01984 
.01217 
.01690 

21813  

21909  
27308 

34405  
43505 

45705  

55007  
69305 

76206  
92506  

Average  

4.27 

292.6 

5.  03397 

.017689 

Total  pro-   Proteid 
teid  nitro-  nitrogen  in 

gen  in  all  average  ker- 
kernels      nel  * 

(gram). 

(gram). 

0.63107  - 

0.0006420 

.16377  '   .0007582 

.53889     .0010265 

.18726  i   .0007373 

.17875     .0008635 

.05974     .0006423 

.03148  j   .0007155 

.09082 

.0007696 

.09030 

.0008767 

.24213     .0005417 

.  16993 

.0007421 

.21674 

.00075594 

MORE  THAN  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN 


17505... 
21206 

4.70 
5.23 

29 
149 

0.3885 
2.8564 

0.01340 
.01917 

1 
0.01826     0.0006296 
.  14939     .  0010026 

21210  

5.03 

237 

3.9143 

.  01578 

.19689     .0007934 

21706 

4.71 

807 

19.  3318 

.  02390 

.91052  j    .0011283 

21911  

5.48 

383 

8.4593 

.02209 

.46356  i    .0012103 

38605  .  . 

5.&5 

61 

1.2124 

.01988 

.07093     .0011627 

38607 

4.55 

19 

.3037 

.  01598 

.  01382     .  0007273 

40205  

4.69 

194 

3.6302 

.01871 

.  17026  |    .  0008776 

48406  . 

4.87 

249 

3.2964 

.  01324 

.  16053  '    .  0006447 

65305  

4.92 

78 

1.8018 

.  02310 

.08865     .0011365 

69805  
72605 

5.82 
4.65 

110 

65 

2.4420 
1.1166 

.02220 
.01718 

.14213  i    .0012921 
.  05192      0007988 

72607  

5.59 

188 

3.  4442 

.  01832 

.19253  i    .0010241 

92306 

4.93 

347 

6.0091 

.  01732 

.  29625  !    .  0008539 

Average  

5.07 

208.28 

4.  15727 

.01859 

.208974     .0009487 

TABLE  9. — Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  of  proteid 

nitrogen.     Crop  of  1903. 


Range  of  per- 
centage of  proteid 
nitrogen. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Number  of— 

Weight  (in  grams) 
of— 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(in  grams)  in  — 

Analy- 
ses. 

Ker- 
nels. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

All  ker- 
nels. 

Average 
kernel. 

1  to  2  

1.749 
2.32 
2.73 
3.18 
3.69 
4.27 
5.07 

28 
65 
145 
66 
22 
11 
14 

320.3 
396 
370 
235 
190 
292 
208 

6.2382 
8.2502 
7.  1755 
4.3856 
3.  6895 
5.0340 
4.  1573 

0.01871 
.02011 
.01935 
.01837 
.01867 
.01769 
.01859 

0.  10655 
.  19032 
.  19442 
.  13966 
.  13698 
.  21674 
.20897 

0.  0003291 
.0004660 
.0005271 
.  0005816 
.0006872 
.  0007559 
.0009487 

2  to  2.5 

2  5  to  3 

3  to  3.5  

3.5  to  4 

4  to  4.5  

4.5  and  over  . 

Table  10  shows  the  analyses  of  the  crop  of  1903  arranged  on  the 
basis  of  weight  of  average  kernel.  Determinations  of  gliadin  and 
glutenin  were  made  in  these  analyses  and  the  sums  of  these  are 
inserted  in  this  table. a  All  plants  having  an  average  kernel  weight 

a  Determinations  of  gliadin  and  glutenin  were  made  by  methods  practically  the  same  as 
those  described  by  Prof.  Harry  Snyder  in  Bulletin  No.  63  of  the  Minnesota  Experiment 
Station,  except  that  smaller  quantities  were  used. 


SOME    PROPEKTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


65 


of  less  than  0.010  gram  form  the  first  class  and  each  succeeding  class 
increases  by  0.002  gram.     Table  11  is  a  summary  of  these  analyses. 

TABLE  10. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  Icernel.    Crop  of  1903. 
WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.000  TO  0.010  GRAM. 


Record 
number. 

Weight     Num- 
of  aver-     ber  of 
age        kernels 
kernel         on 
(gram),    plant. 

Weight 
of  kernels 
on  plant 
(grams). 

Per- 
centage 
of  pro- 
teid  ni- 
trogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin     nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Average  i  Kernels 
kernel,    i  on  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

22306... 

5710,-)  
58206  
9550 

Average  . 

0.00953  :        283 
.00916           407 
.00943  !        148 
.00850            37 

2.6965 
.  3.  7263 
1.3961 
.3146 

2.81 
2.76 
2.67 
2.81 

0.0002677 
.0002527 
.0002519 
.0002389 

0.07577 
.10285 
.03728 
.00884 

1.97 

0.0001877 

0.05312 

.00915  1        219 

2.0334 

2.76 

.0002,528 

.05618 

1.97 

.0001877  !     .05312 

i 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.010  TO  0.012  GRAM. 


•tTOflfi 

0  01086 

19 

0  2063 

2  44 

0  0002649 

0  00503 

45605 

01161 

61 

7081 

2  82 

0003273 

.01997 

JQQOfi 

01085 

221 

2  3982 

3  30 

0003581 

07914 

5790! 

58705. 

•  .  r  'i  is 

.01118 
.01082 
01175 

221 
235 
322 

.'.  1  7:il 
2.5436 
3  78^8 

3.18 
3.01 
3  jo 

.0003556 
.0003258 
0003642 

.07859 
.07656 
11  7r>7 

2.92  0.0003264 
2.47  .0002673 

0.07221 
.06283 

Average  . 

.01118 

179 

2.0187 

2.98 

.0003326 

.06276 

2.69  .0002968 

.06752 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.012  TO  0.014  GRAM. 


17505 

0  01340 

29 

0  3885 

4.70 

0.0006296 

0.  01826 

'•>•'!  1-1 

01399 

31 

4336 

•  3  34 

0005371 

01665 

26105 

01393 

131 

1  8242 

3  02 

0003662 

05.508 

''I   1  H 

01341 

346 

4  6383 

2  37 

0003177 

10967 

40405 

01373 

46 

6316 

3  17 

0004352 

02002 

I'1"!  l>. 

01264 

25 

3161 

1  46 

0001846 

00462 

45005. 
45805 

.01376 
01234 

235 
124 

3.2340 
1  5298 

3.58 
1  84 

.0004927 
0002700 

.  1  1575 
02815 

1.36 

0.0001871 

0.04398 

18406 

01276 

76 

9701 

3  31 

0004225 

03211 

18406! 

48408 

.01324 
01291 

249 
27 

3.2964 
3485 

4.87 
2  81 

.0006447 
0003627 

.16053 
00979 

2.25 

.0002979 

.08168 

48505. 
50706 

.01398 
01343 

137 
35 

1.9154 
.4701 

3.66 
2  80 

.0005117 
0003761 

.07010 
.01316 

1.76 

.0002460 

.03371 

5820?! 

58905 

.01375 
01355 

307 
170 

4.2207 
2.3031 

3.09 
2.43 

.0004248 
.0003292 

.13042 
.05596 

2.49 

.0003424 

.10510 

,  £0£ 

0121° 

111 

1  3-151 

3  25 

0003938 

04272 

7620H. 
85206 

.01217 
01312 

447 
376 

5.4411 
4.9315 

4.45 
2.66 

.0005417 
.0003332 

.24213 
.13118 

2.03 

.0002471 

.11046 

94605 

01307 

56 

00 

7319 

1  95 

0002549 

01427 

Average  . 

.01323 

1.55.7 

2.0510 

3.12 

.0004120 

.06687 

1.98 

.0002641 

.07499 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.014  TO  0.016  GRAM. 


18805      0  01567 

137 

2  146^ 

2  02 

0  0003164 

0  04335 

L8905.      .01443 
18906       01420 

103 
65 

1.4864 
9229 

3.81 
3.48 

.0005498 
.0004941 

.05663 
.03212 

1.54 

0.0003218 

0.03315 

21210.   .   .01577 
•'1710        01437 

237 
59 

3.9143 

8478 

5.03 
2  59 

.0007934 
0003722 

.19689 
02196 

1.34 

.0002113 

.05245 

21812.   .   .01507 
-".1(17.   .    .01416 
33408       01446 

983 
144 

77 

14.8139 
2.0390 
1  1139 

4.26 
3.92 
1  39 

.0006420 
.0005551 
0002009 

.63107 
.07993 
01547 

2.02 
1.35 

.0003044 
.0001912 

.29934 
.02753 

38607       .01598 

19 

3037 

4  55 

0007273 

.01382 

01555 

93 

1  4464 

4  13 

000o423 

05974 

48407       01572 

718 

11  2890 

1  50 

0002358 

16933 

50906       .01516 

114 

1  7280 

3  57 

0005411 

06189 

55006.   .   .01593 
.-.-.:«).->.   .   .01507 
57006       01453 

451 
167 
701 

7.1852 
2.5160 
10  1836 

3.16 

2.48 
2  76 

.0005034 
.0003736 

1  KIM  III]  II 

.22705 
.06240 
28107 

1.7.5 
1.97 

.0002788 
.0002969 

.  12574 
.04957 

27889— Xo.  78—05- 


66 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  10. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  kernel.     Crop  of 

1903 — Continued. 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.014  TO  0.016  GRAM— Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels 
on 
plant. 

Weight 
of  kernels 
on  plant 
(grams). 

Per- 
centage 
of  pro- 
teid  ni- 
trogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin      nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

57506  
63506  
69705  
72905  
74508  
86105  
92205  
92305  
92905  
92906  
94905  
95707  

Average  . 

0.  01534 
.01568 
.01550 
.01585 
.01434 
.01495 
.01525 
.01491 
.01534 
.01592 
.01553 
.01457 

180 
153 
244 

167 
57 
203 
345 
160 
176 
181 
286 
52 

2.  7616 
2.  3986 
3.  7810 
2.  6462 
.8172 
3.0282 
5.  2616 
2.3859 
2.7000 
2.8816 
4.4423 
.7577 

2.80 
2.44 
2.50 
2.48 
2.60 
2.56 
2.74 
2.93 
3.50 
2.99 
2.35 
2.47 

0.  0004296 
.0003825 
.0003874 
.0003930 
.0003728 
.  0003923 
.0004179 
.0004369 
.0005369 
.  0004760 
.0003650 
.0003599 

0.07733 
.05853 
.09453 
.06563 
.02125 
.07964 
.  14417 
.06991 
.09450 
.08616 
.  10439 
.  01872 

2.34     0.0003590 

0.0(14f2 

1 

I 

i 

.09320 

.  01516 

232 

3.5480 

3.00 

.  0004555 

.10619 

1.76 

.  0002805 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.016  TO  0.018  GRAM. 


17306 

0.  01645 

243 

3.9968 

3.09 

0.  0005082 

0.  12350 

17406 

.01686 

124 

2.0907 

3.29 

.  0005547 

.  06878 

17507...  . 

.01795 

43 

.7720 

3.80 

.0006822 

.02934 

20705 

.  01698 

109 

1.8517 

3.09 

.  0005249 

.  05722 

21208  
21209 

.01798 
.  01627 

287 
89 

5.  1594 
1.4484 

3.24 
3.61 

.0005824 
.0005875 

.  16712 
.  05228 

2.15 

O.COG38..0 

Q.  11093 

21307 

.  01796 

143 

2.  5691 

3.04 

.0005461 

.07810 

21308  

.01641 

354 

5.8080 

3.45 

.0005660 

.20038 

21805 

.01699 

1,232 

20.9290 

2.69 

.  0004569 

.  56299 

21808  
22206.  . 
22208  
26806  

.01708 
.01720 
.01619 
.01793 

1,156 
146 
118 
152 

19.7446 
2.5712 
1.9090 
2.  7255 

2.57 
3.22 
3.18 

2.60 

.0004389 
.0005538 
.  0005144 
.0004662 

.50744 
.08086 
.06071 
.07086 

1.93 
2.11 
2.14 

.0003348 
.  0003629 
.0003465 

.  38700 
.  05425 
.  04084 

26808  
26907  
26909  
27308  

.01748 
.01792 
.01667 
.01777 

222 
102 
180 
254 

3.8811 
1.8276 
2.9999 
4.  5123 

3.09 
2.61 
2.80 
4.15 

.0005402 
.0004677 
.0004667 
.0007373 

.11992 
.04995 
.08400 
.  18726 

2.28 
""i.'ss" 

.0003935 
".'6663134" 

.08849 
"."  05640" 

33106  

.01716 

18 

.3089 

2.94 

.000.5045 

.00908 

33406 

.01627 

283 

4.  6045 

2.87 

.  0004670 

.  13215 

37707... 
39507...  . 

.01710 
.01699 

193 
111 

3.3004 
1.8862 

2.93 
3.02 

.0005010 
.  0005132 

.09670 
.  05696 

2.10 

.0003591 

"dissi 

44505  

.01764 

340 

5.9990 

2.94 

.  0005187 

.17637 

45705  

.01712 

44 

.7532 

4.18 

.0007155 

.03148 

46105  

.01775 

260 

4.  6146 

3.00 

.  0005324 

.13843 

46107  
48306  
48506  
48705  
48706  

.01756 
.01692 
.01701 
.01652 
.01635 

478 
157 
556 
264 
379 

8.3935 
2.6571 
9.4585 
4.3615 
6.1986 

2.54 
3.29 
3.20 
3.13 
3.00 

.0004460 
.0005568 
.0005444 
.0005171 
.0004906 

.21319 
.08742 
.30267 
.  13652 
.  18596 

2.08 
2.13 
2.17 
1.56 

.0003652 
.  0003f  04 
.0003(91 
.0002577 

.  17458 
.05660 
.20525 
.  06804 

48806  

.01798 

.  547 

9.8346 

2.70 

.0004877 

.26553 

55205... 

.01723 

40 

.6893 

3.10 

.  0005342 

.02137 

55307  
55508  
55607  

.  01663 
.01732 
.01734 

342 
216 
138 

5.6864 
3.  7407 
2.  3931 

1.89 
3.11 
2.69 

.0003142 
.0005386 
.000*665 

.  10747 
.11636 
.06437 

1.56 
1.96 

.0002594 
.0003395 

.08871 
.07332 

55905  
55906  
56105  
56107  
56209... 
57005  
57305  . 

.01751 
.01603 
.01709 
.01658 
.01664 
.01746 
.01666 

331 
499 
336 
872 
950 
88 
501 

5.  7948 
7.9968 
5.  7431 
14.  4556 
15.8086 
1.5364 
8.  5777 

2.67 
2.81 
2.73 
2.96 
2.59 
2.71 
3.19 

.0004674 
.0004503 
.0004667 
.  0004907 
.0004310 
.0004731 
.  0005826 

.  15470 
.  22471 
.  15679 
.42790 
.40945 
.04164 
.29188 

1.75 
1.47 
2.12 
2.23 
2.21 
2.09 

.0003064 
.  0002356 
.0003622 
.0003697 
.  0003677 
.0003649 

.10141 
.  11755 
.  12175 
.32236 
.34937 
.03211 

57308.  .  . 

.01705 

577 

9.8378 

1.69 

.0002881 

.  16626 

57509  

.01739 

611 

10.  6261 

2.54 

.0004417 

.26990 

59606 

.01712 

567 

9.7084 

2.16 

.  0003f,98 

.20970 

60605  

.01701 

35 

.5952 

1.87 

.0003180 

.01113 

63105  

.01717 

90 

1.5452 

3.24 

.0005563 

.  05007 

66006  

.01642 

366 

6.0090 

3.54 

.0005812 

.21272 

1.38 

.  0002266 

.08292 

su.MK    IM-IOI'KKTIKS    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


67 


TABLE  10. — Analyses  of  plans,  arranged  according  te  weight  of  average  kernel     Crop  of 

r.io.j— Continued. 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  K K R.\ ML.  0.016  TO  0.018  G RAM-Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Weight 
of  aver- 

(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 

kernel- 
on 
plant. 

Weight 
of  kernels 
on  plant 

opnt«~<rp     proteid  nitrogen 

(cTftin)  in  

Perrent- 

plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin      nitn><rt  n 
(gram)  in- 

trogen 
,  in  ker- 
nels. 

JSSSP 

Kernels 
on  plant 

Average 

kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

72606... 

74806!!!!! 

74607... 
76205  
81406  
85205.    . 

86106  
91905  
9190o.  .  . 
92207  
92306.... 
92405... 
92407  
92505.  .  .  . 
92508 
92908  
94407  

95510;;;" 
95705  

A  vi-  rap-  . 

0.01718 
.01724 
.01781 
.01784 
.01C99 
.01695 
.01721 
.01625 
.01749 
.01739 
.01774 
.01767 
.01732 
.01605 
.01695 
.01706 
.01690 
.01732 
.01615 
.01696 
.01783 
.01626 

65 
543 
23 
399 
491 
498 
72 
214 
436 
198 
200 
209 
347 
214 
53 
156 
229 
187 
419 
218 
159 
636 

1.1166 
9.3629 
.4096 
7.1181 
8.3406 
8.4407 
1.2391 
3.4766 
7.6241 
3.4436 
3.5486 
3.6926 
6.0091 
3.4356 
.8983 
2.6615 
3.8709 
3.2388 
6.7664 
3.6977 
2.8356 
10.3426 

4.65 
1.89 
2.73 
2.60 
2.56 
2.35 
3.31 
2  60 
2.63 
3.36 
2.81 
2.55 
4.93 
3.10 
1.66 
3.00 
4.39 
2.32 
2.07 
3.60 
1.81 
2.54 

0.0007988 
.0003414 
.0004862 
.0004638 
.0004349 
.0003983 
.0005697 
.0004224 
.0004599 
.0005844 
.0004986 
.0004505 
.0008539 
.0004977 
.0002814 
.0005118 
.0007421 
.0004018 
.0003343 
.0006106 
.0003228 
.0004131 

0.05192 
.18538 
.01118 
.18507 
.21352 
.19836 
.04101 
.09039 
.20052 
.11570 
.09972 
.09416 
.29625 
.10650 
.01491 
.07985 
.16993 
.07514 
.14007 
.13312 
.05132 
.26270 





4.06 

0.0007032 

0.  24397 

;;;;;;;;; 

.... 



.01709 

305.9 

5.2055 

2.93       .0005020         .14618 

2.07 

.0003519 

.13548 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.018  TO  0.020  GRAM. 


17305.  .  . 

0.01984 

183 

3.6302 

3.03 

0.0006010 

;  0.10999 

1 

17408  

.01852 

497 

9.2038 

2.18 

.0004037 

.20065 

I 

17409.... 

.01857 

802 

14.8957 

2.75 

.0005108 

.40964 

20710  
21205.... 

.01974 
.01922 

867 
123 

17.1115 
2.3642 

2.83 
3.16 

.0005586 
.0006074 

.48428 
.07471 

2.00 

0.0003948 

6.34222 

21206  

.01917 

149 

2.8564 

5.23 

.0010026 

.14939 

21207  

.01955 

118 

2.3066 

2.% 

.0005766 

.06804 

21306  

.01837 

226 

4.  1516 

2.90 

.0005327 

.12039 

21711  

.01968 

873 

17.1820 

2.71 

.0005334 

.46563 

2180P  
21810.... 

.01919 
.01982 

418 
52 

8.0214 
1.0304 

2.73 
2.69 

.0005238 
.0005330 

.21898 
.02772 

2.18 

.0004183 

.  17487 

21813  
21905... 
21907...  . 
21912  

.01877 
.01809 
.01851 
.01907 

216 
791 
158 
510 

4.0258 
14.3111 
2.9248 
9.7236 

4.04 
2.64 
3.35 
2.31 

.0007582 
.0004777 
.0006201 
.0004404 

.16377 
.37781 
.09798 
.22461 

2.14 
2.18 
2.15 

.0004017 
.0003944 
.0003980 

.08615 
.31198 
.06288 

22207  
26905  
26906.  .  .  . 
27005.  .  . 
27205  
27306  

.01940 
.01966 
.01859 
.01895 
.01841 
.01945 

169 
326 
228 
866 
891 
684 

3.2787 
6.4102 
4.2376 
16.4120 
16.4061 
13.3011 

2.77 
2.76 
2.71 
2.63 
2.41 
2.47 

.0005374 
.0005427 
.0005037 
.0004984 
.0003437 
.0004803 

.09082 
.17692 
.11484 
.43164 
.39539 
.32853 

1.82 
2.09 
1.82 
1.90 
1.70 

.0003531 
.0004109 
.0003383 
.0003600 
.0003130. 

.05967 
.  13398 
.07712 
.31182 
.27890 

27307  

.01847 

167 

.  3.0850 

2.53 

.0004674 

.07805 

27507  

.01833 

75 

1.3746 

3.08 

.000.5646 

.04234 

28301 

32207  

.01996 
.01822 

219 
69 

4.3698 
1.2573 

3.07 
3.48 

.0006126 
.000  341 

.13415 
.04375 

2.42 

.0004830 

.  10575 

32608  

.01851 

55 

1.0183 

3.78 

.<*¥  K'I'IS 

.03849 

33105  
33107  
33405  

.01939 
.01919 
.01930 

132 
318 
421 

2.5601 
6.1026 
8.1268 

2.91 
2.35 
2.03 

.0003919 

.07450 
.14341 
.16498 

3.50 
1.92 

.0006787 
.0001163 

.07450 
.12643 

33906...... 

.01921 

119 

2.2862 

2.81 

.0005399 

.06424 

34205  

.01972 

464 

9.  1498 

2.73 

.0005383 

.24979 

34206  

.01968 

81 

1.5940 

3.73 

.0007340 

.05946 

34208  

.01916 

156 

2.9886 

2.13 

.0004081 

.06366 

34405  
36905  

.01994 
.01880 

207 
267 

4.1281 
5.0200 

4.33 
3.88 

.0008635 
.0007295 

.  17875 
.19478 

2.44 

.0004865 

.  10073 

37305  
37705  
38005 

.01987 
.01972 
01806 

309 
461 
139 

6.1394 
8.0905 
2  SI^W 

2.96 
2.64 

.0005881 
.0005327 

.  18173 
.23998 

2.29 
1.26 

.0004550 
.0002485 

.14060 
.10194 

38506  

.01978 

88 

1.6799 

2.89 

.0005712 

.07138 
.04855 

1.23 

.0002224 

.03091 

38605  

.01987 

61 

1.2124 

5.85 

.0011627 

.07093 

38608  
38706  

.01913 
.01988 

158 
365 

3.0228 
7.2545 

2.82 

•_'.:,'< 

.08522 
.18789 

1.73 

.0003309 

.05229 

40205  

.01871 

194 

3.6302 

4.69 

.0008776 

.17026 

3.07 

.0005744 

.11145 

68 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  10. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  iceight  of  average  kernel.     Crop  of 

1903 — Continued. 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.018  TO  0.020  GRAM— Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels 
on 
plant. 

Weight 
of  kernels 
on  plant 
(grams)  . 

Per- 
centage 
of  pro- 
teid  ni- 
trogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin      nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

42205.  .  . 
42905  
44607  
45606  
46106  
48106.  .  .  . 
48508  
49505  
50705  
51005  
55007  
55008  
55206  
55306  
,55507  
56106  
56205  
56206  
57007  
57306  
57307  
5740'o  
57407  
57507  
57608  
57805  
58805  
59605  
63505  
65306  
65307  
66008  
69305  
69505... 
72406  
72607  
72806  
74507  
81405  
81505  
84905  
84906  
88905  
88906  
92208  
92408  
92409  
92507  
92909  
94205  
94206  
94207  
94209  
94406  
94906  
94907  
94908  
95506... 
95o08  
95706  

Average  . 

0.01967 
.  01866 
.01806 
.01834 
.01964 
.01919 
.01858 
.01898 
.01986 
.01804 
.01828 
.01846 
.  01965 
.01931 
.  01949 
.01866 
.01959 
-    .01829 
.01975 
.01838 
-.01801 
.01846 
.01968 
.01946 
.01968 
.01814 
.01999 
.01880 
.01934 
.01807 
.01878 
.01814 
.01984 
.01847 
.01929 
.01832 
.01908 
.01869 
.01862 
.01940 
.01927 
.01975 
.01811 
.01814 
.  01876 
.01827 
.01814 
.01916 
.01916 
.01893 
.01866 
.01909 
.01805 
.01923 
.01808 
.01948 
.01894 
.01852 
.01954 
.01934 

94 
67 
101 
220 
82 
608 
603 
67 
30 
862 
118 
944 
578 
214 
504 
644 
333 
509 
168 
434 
261 
135 
762 
359 
438 
270 
1,158 
382 
208 
544 
373 
174 
103 
255 
430 
188 
110 
493 
240 
146 
37 
382 
293 
546 
353 
207 
315 
505 
529 
64 
402 
718 
190 
549 
685 
626 
125 
597 
740 
267 

.8494 
.2499 
.8246 
.0358 
.6103 
11.6655 
11.2008 
1.2716 
.5958 
15.5835 
2.  1571 
17.4226 
11.3592 
4.1323 
9.8228 
12.0161 
6.  5232 
9.3093 
3.3176 
7.9772 
4.7117 
2.4923 
14.9992 
6.9861 
8.  6189 
4.8988 
23.  1471 
7.  1828 
4.  0230 
9.8298 
7.0051 
3.  1555 
2.0430 
4.7116 
8.2929 
3.  4442 
2.0970 
9.2130 
4.5737 
2.8327 
.7130 
7.5438 
5.3069 
9.9034 
6.6206 
3.  7820 
5.7131 
9.  6779 
10.  1363 
1.2117 
7.5006 
13.7057 
3.6006 
10.  5556 
12.3862 
12.  1918 
2.3678 
11.0548 
14.4617 
5.1629 

3.63 
3.17 
2.44 
1.91 
2.54 
2.38 
2.76 
3.24 
3.54 
1.34 
4.21 
2.60 
2.56 
2.18 
2.63 
2.57 
2.51 
2.42 
2.65 
2.86 
2.43 
2.75 
2.62 
2.85 
2.64 
2.87 
2.74 
2.12 
1.90 
2.41 
2.28 
3.59 
4.42 
2.29 
2.95 
5.59 
3.01 
3.02 
2.62 
2.94 
2.32 
3.43 
2.83 
2.65 
2.72 
2.97 
2.30 
2.58 
2.70 
1.65 
2.78 
2.86 
2.49 
2.47 
3.41 
2.94 
1.96 
2.74 
2:56 
2.73 

0.0007142 
.0005447 
.0004408 
.0003504 
.0004988 
.0004567 
.0005127 
.0006149 
.0007032 
.0002422 
.0007696 
.0004799 
.0005031 
.0004210 
.0005126 
.  0004795 
.0004917 
.0004426 
.0005233 
.  0005,257 
.0004387 
.0005077 
.0005157 
.  0005545 
.  0005195 
.  0005207 
-.0005464 
.0003986 
.0003674 
.0004282 
.0004355 
.  0008510 
.0008767 
.0004231 
.0005689 
.0010241 
.0005738 
.  0005644 
.  0004879 
.0005704 
.0004471 
.  0006773 
.0005126 
.0004807 
.  0005102 
.  0005426 
.0004171 
.  0004944 
.0005173 
.0003124 
.0005187 
.0005460 
.0004719 
.0004749 
.0006166 
.  0005726 
.  0003713 
.0005074 
.0005003 
.0005279 

0.06713 
.03650 
.04452 
.07708 
.04090 
.27765 
.30986 
.04120 
.02109 
.20881 
.09082 
.45299 
.29079 
.09008 
.25834 
.30881 
.  16373 
.22529 
.08792 
.22815 
.11445 
.06854 
.39297 
.  19905 
.22756 
.  14080 
.63422 
.  15228 
.07644 
.  23690 
.  15971 
.11328 
.09030 
.10790 
24464 

2.73     0.0005370     0.05049 

1.80 

.0003454       .20997 

2.21 
1.58 
1.87 

.0004040 
.0002917 
.0003675 

.04767 

.  27528 
.21241 

2.07 
2.09 
1.85 
1.95 

.6604034 
.0003900 
.0003624 
.0003566 

.  20333 
.25114 
.  12068 
.18153 

2.13 
1.86 
1.55 

.0003932 
.0003660 
.0003016 

.05309 

.27898 
.  10828 

2.68. 
2.11 

.0004861 
.0004218 

.  13126 

.48839 

1.68 
1.81 

.  0003036 
.0003399 

.  16514 
.12680 

.19253 
.08312 
.27823 
.11710 
.08328 
.01654 
.25873 
.15019 
.  26245 
.18008 
.11233 
.  13140 
.24969 
.27367 
.01999 
.20851 
.39199 
.08965 
.26073 
.42236 
.35844 
.04641 
.30291 
.37023 
.14095 

2.51 

.6664598 

.  08645 

2.65 

.0005141 

.07507 

.01901 

349.6 

6.6327 

2.88 

.0005476  1       .18039 

2.08 

.  0003979 

.15541 

WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.020  TO  0.022  GRAM. 


17308      0  0201° 

61 

1  2275 

3  25 

0  0006540 

0  03994 

17405       02127 

738 

15  6996 

2  13 

0004531 

33441 

20708...     .02033 
20708       02024 

163 
122 

3.3138 
2  4690 

2.78 
2  58 

.0005652 
0005221 

.  09212 
06399 

2.05 

0.  0004168 

0.  06793 

20709...     .02033 
20805  !   .02157 

258 
C97 

5.3229 
14.  6942 

3.05 
3.32 

.0003292 
.000,5999 

.  16235 

.48784 

2.31 
2.26 

.0004766 
.0004875 

.12296 
.33208 

SOME    PROPERTIES    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


69 


T\BLE  10. — Annlyxex  of  plant*,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  Tcernel.     Crop  of 

IMti— Continued. 


WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.020  TO  0.022  GRAM-Continued. 


Record 
iiuin   <T. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels 
on 
plant. 

Per- 

SftK  ££ 

nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin      nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 

Average 
kernel. 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

Kern:  Is 
on  plant. 

21301 

"7  
•J  1  7011  
21*11  
21WV    ... 
•J1913  
22210  
22211  
25205  
26908  
27207  
27305  
27505  
28806  
32206  
:<2-(>n  
3330.-,  
:woti  
:«tm7  

377M  i  
38606  
39205  
39405  
40305  
-Hi  .().->     . 
4460o  
48409  
55005  

:,-,-,<  i 

55605  
.55908  
57405  
5741- 
58806  
63106  
6530S  

69506...   . 
69806  
727(1.-,... 
72707  
73308.... 
7430.-,.    .    . 
746M  
80305  
81705. 
M70*;  
81708...   . 
8440--.  
ffi  
8860* 

92406.  .  . 

•  :. 
95507  

'.'.V-C.t  

AM  • 

0.02049 
.02004 
.02125 
.02141 
.02101 
.02056 
.02072 
.02019 
.02062 
.02066 
.02073 
.02004 
.  .  i_i  IBS 
.02183 
.02111 
.02052 
.02145 
.02090 
.02144 
.02125 
.02194 
.02155 
.02110 
.02089 
.02093 
.02011 
.02049 
.02035 
.02048 
.02028 
.02062 
.02184 
.02175 
.02031 
.02047 
.02049 
.02001 
.02008 
.02073 
.02047 
.021.53 
.02191 
.02036 
.020o2 
.02047 
.(12079 
.02165 
.021  o»; 
.02132 
.02175 
.02043 
.02068 
.02075 
.02100 
.02168 
.02040 
.02029 
.02136 

84 
312 
582 
361 
567 
173 
492 
298 
561 
522 
192 
166 
267 
539 
685 
507 
94 
150 
382 
136 
508 
56 
401 
1,031 
447 
179 
55 
124 
314 
393 
866 
500 
562 
41 
596 
95 
165 
583 
370 
663 
568 
372 
225 
414 
216 
464 
729 
4H5 
722 
757 
428 
481 
74 
470 
380 
219 
571 
138 

1.7216 
6.2514 
12.3685 
7.  7'JW 
11.9114 
3.  5574 
10.  1925 
6.0173 
11.5675 
10.7836 
3.9797 
3.3266 
o.  0660 
12.0399 
14.4630 
10.4036 
2.0162 
3.1346 
8.1890 
2.8903 
11.1476 
1.2069 
8.4605 
21.5399 
9.3541 
3.6003 
1.1271 
2.5235 
6.4302 
7.9684 
17.8506 
10.9180 
12.2210 
.  8328 
12.2004 
1.94P9 
3.3006 
11.7066 

13.56% 
12.0136 
9.1522 
4.5806 

4.4222 
9.6451 
15.7835 
9.7922 
15.3928 
Iti.  4l,!»2 
8.7448 
9.94.56 
1.5355 
9.8719 
8.2366 
4.4673 
12.1592 
2.9475 

2.16 
2.  67 
2.19 
2.47 
3.75 
3.82 
3.01 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.96 
2.92 
2.58 
2.12 
3.02 
1.81 
2.88 
3.41 
2.21 
3.22 
1.61 
2.34 
2.63 
2.11 
2.88 
3.11 
2.86 
2.90 
2.02 
3.05 
2.80 
2.64 
2.42 
1.98 
2.61 
1.88 
2.79 
2.09 
2.63 
2.50 
1.66 
2.13 
3.49 
2.45 
1.98 
2.30 
1.81 
1.98 
2.71 
2.28 
2.48 
2.53 
2.47 
2.42 
3.11 
2.56 
2.56 
2.48 

0.0004427 
.0005350 
.0004654 
.0005289 
.0007877 
.0007855 
.0006235 
.0006401 
.0006537 
.0005599 
.0006135 
.0005850 
.0005379 
.0004627 
.0006376 
.0003714 
.0006177 
.0007126 
.0004738 
.0006843 
.0003533 
.0005053 
.0005549 
.0004407 
.0006027 
.OOOP255 
.0005861 
.0005902 
.0004137 
.0006185 
.0005773 
.0005765 
.0005262 
.0004022 
.0005343 
.0003853 
.000.5581 
.0004197 
.0005451 
.0005117 
.0003574 
.0004668 
.0007105 
.0005052 
.0004054 
.0004781 
.0003919 
.0004170 
.0005778 
.00049f.O 
.0005067 
.0005231 
.0005125 
.0005082 
.000.  .741 
.0006320 
.0006515 
.0005297 

0.03718 
.16691 
.27086 
.19092 
.44666 
.13589 
.30680 
.  19075 
.36671 
.28560 
.11780 
.09712 
.14362 
.24942. 
.43679 
.18831 
.05807 
.10(589 
.18098 
.09307 
.17948 
.02824 
.22251 
.45435 
.21399 
.11197 
.03223 
.07318 
.12989 
.24303 
.4995 
.  28823 
.29575 
.01649 
.31842 
.03660 
.09208 
.24468 
.20170 
.33923 
.  19043 
.19936 
.15986 
.20918 
.08756 
.22184 
.28569 
.19388 

.  H7i:> 

.37548 
.21687  i 
.25162 
.03793 
.23890 
.25616 
.11436 
.31492 
.07310 

1 

1.97      O.WXM94S      0.12315 

2.16 
1.88 

.0004538 
.0003955 

.25728 
.06688 

1.55 
l.Cfl 

.0003129 
.0003485 

.09327 
.19548 

2.16 
1.95 
1.73 
1.65 
1.86 

.0004478 
.0003908 
.0003t07 
.0003602 
.0000926 

.08596 
.06487 
.09630 
:  19866 
.26901 

2.41 

.0005037 

.07554 

2.45 

.000520<> 

.07081 

1.39       .0002933 
1.84        .0003844 
1.44       .0003014 

.11760 
.39635 
.13470 

i.29  ;  .0662625 

1.50       .0003072 
1.99       .0004036 
2.20       .0004536 
1.96       .0004281 
1.96  *•    .0004263 

.03255 
.09C45 
.15857 
.39272 
.21400 
.23953 

1.64        .0003357 

.20008 

2.20        .0004402 
1.95        .0003916 

2.18        .0004519 

.072M 
.22828 
.  16714 

2.05        .00042t>2 
1.77       .0003832 
1.96        .0004128 
2.03       .0004328 

.  19772 
.27937 
.  19193 
.31248 

.02085 

386.6 

8.1267 

2.60 

.0005422 

.20510             1.92 

.0003999 

.  17351 

WKIGHT  OF  AVr:RAGK   KKRNr.L.  0.^2  TO  0:024  GRAM. 


17307  

0.02279 

138 

3.1454 

3.46  0.0007886 

0.  10883 

17410... 

.02385 

744 

16.  9987 

2.88   .0006580 

.48957 

20707  
21706  

.03282 
.02390 

444 

807 

9.9070 
19.3318 

2.77   .UW5181 
4.71   .0011283 

.27443 
.91052 

l.sfi  O.WI04-_»-.'2  0.18328 

21708  

.02381 

:;<•<, 

9.2850 

2.33   .0005547 

21634 

21806... 

.02378 

599 

14.2450 

2.71  1  .0006444 

.38604 

21909  
21911  

.02317 
.02209 

525 
383 

12.  1819 
8.4593 

4.43   .0010265 
5.48   .0012103 

..53889 
.46356 

1.9.s   .(KX).-,t.77   .29846 

70 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  10. — Analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  Tcernel.     Crop  of 

1903— Continued. 


WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  J.022  TO.  0.024  GRAM— Continued. 


Record 
number. 


Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 

(gram). 


25206 


26807.... 

27506.... 

27508. . . . 

27509.... 

32605.... 

33407.... 

33605.... 

34207.... 

34G08.... 

38505. . . . 

38609.... 

42405.... 

43405. . . . 

48507.... 

55308. . . . 

55606... 

56207.... 

56208. . . . 

57606.... 

57007.... 

63107.... 

65305... 


71905. . . . 
72708. . . . 
73307.... 
73308. . . 
81707.... 
81710.... 
88607... 
91305. . . 


0.02281 
.02304 
.02248 
.02390 
.02252 
.02287 
.02206 
.02323 
.02271 
.02345 
.02219 
.02213 
.02252 
.02309 
.02251 
.02258 
.02296 
.02395 
.02205 
.02361 
.02356 
.02333 
.02234 
.02233 
.02310 
.02220 
.02239 
.02270 
.02229 
.02291 
.02336 
.02308 
.02205 
.02242 


Average  .   .  02285 


Num- 


Per- 
centage 


Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in- 


205 
90 

220  | 
721  I 
444 
251  I 

243  ; 

225  i 
305 
301 
611  I 
280  i 
563  ! 
293  i 

66  I 
124  j 

70 

397  i 
503  i 
462  | 
563 
132 
736 
417 

78 

110 

1,260 

398 

25 
624 
786 
396 
234 
138 


388.1 


4. 6754 

2.0737 

4.9456 

17.2324 

10.0005 

5. 5324 

5.3615 

5.2268 

7.0889 

7.0596 

13. 5556 

6. 1962 

12. 1088 

6. 7665 

1 . 4892 

2.8000 

1.6036 

9.5078 

11.0930 

10.9073 

13.5720 

3.0790 

16.4433 

9.3120 

1.8018 

2.4420 

28.2136 

9.0386 

.  5572 

14.2986 

18.3614 

9.1411 

5.1584 

3.0940 


nels. 


2.76 
2.63 
2.81 
2.80 
2.70 
2.64 
2.90 
1.20 
1.62 
2.39 
2.84 
3.12 
3.61 
2.74 
3.07 
2.92 
2.64 
2.54 
2.58 
2.34 
2.61 
2.74 
1.73 
2.43 
4.92 
5.82 
2.47 
2.27 
2.39 
2.92 
2.34 
1.92 
2.61 
3.21 


:  Average 
kernel. 


0.0006295 
.0006060 
.0006317 
.0008692 
.0006082 
.0006037 
.0006399 
.0002788 
. 0003679 
.0005605 
.0006273 
.0006904 
.0007764 
. 0006475 
.0006927 
.0006594 
.0006062 
.0006225 
.0005690 
.0005524 
.0006149 
. 0005391 
.0003865 
.0005426 
.0011365 
.0012921  ! 
.0005.531 
.0005154 
.0005327 
.0006539 
.0005466  i 
.000*432 
.0005754 
.0007197 


Kernels 
on  plant. 


Percent-       Gliadln-plus-glu- 
age  of          tenin      nitrogen 
gliadin-         (gram)  in- 
plus-glu- 
ter 


nin  ni-  ; 
trogen  in 
kernels. 


Average  |  Kernels 
kernel.     ;  on  plant. 


0.12904  . 

.05454 

.13897 

.48250 

.27003  1.98  0.0004459  0.19800 
.14608  2.32  .0005306  .12835 
.15549  |  1.G9  I  .0002405  .05844 

.06272  ! ! 

.11223  l 

.16872  j  1.92  .0004502  .13554 
.38505  '.. 

.19332  1 

.43713  1.77  .0003986  .21432 
.18540  i  1.34  !  .0003094  .09067 

.04572  i ! 

.08176     1.18  l  .0002664   .03304 

.04233 I 

.24150 j 

.28580     1.49   .0002609   .16529  j 
.25522     1.83   .0004321   . 199CO 
.34616     1.95   .0004594   .26465 

.0843rt 

.24847 

.22628  i 

•  088,:5  " 

.14* 13     1.94   .0004307  i  .04738 

.69*88 

.20*18 

.01332 

.41"52 

.429^5 

.17550 

. 13*63 


8.8879         2.90        .0006624          .25166 


1.74  I  .0004011   .15515 


WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGE  KERNEL,  0.024  TO  0.026  GRAM. 


17506 

21807 

21906... 

2720(5 

28805 

37905. . . 

40505 

48305 

55907... 

72706 

81708 

92206 

94105 

Average . 


0.02460 
.02498 
.02563 


.02512 
.02555 
.02444 
.02.543 
.02590 
.02484 
.02578 
.02407 
.02543 

.02511 


93 

377 


777 
s7 
37 


2.2881 
9.4172 
10.4800 
19.1854 
2.1851 
.9452 


170  i      4. 1546 
473        12.0278 


749 
591 

287 
46 
22 

316.7 


19.  3966 

14.  6802 

7.  3993 

1.1074 


3.52 
2.73 
3.18 
2.36 
2.91 
2.53 
2.82 
2.87 
2.59 
3.86 
2.41 
2.67 
2.67 

2.86 


0. 0008660 
.0006664 
.0008168 
.0005827 
.0007309 
.0006463 
.0006892 
.0007299 
.0006707 
.0009588 
.0006213 
.0006428 
.0006790 


0.08044 
.25709 
. 33403 
. 45276 
.06359 
.02391 
.11716 
.34524 
.50^38 
. 56666 
.17833 
. 02957 
.01494 


2.23 
2.11 
2.10 
1.46 
1.55 


0.0005486 
.0005271 
.0005382 
.0003(05 


2.19  .0005352 
1.77  .0004501 
1.61  !  .0004170 


0. 05102 
. 19870 
.22008 
.28010 
.03387 


.  09099 
.21289 
.31229 


1.64  ,  .0004228  j  .12135 


.0007154    .22816 


1.85 


.0004654 


WEIGHT  OF  AVERAGK  KERNEL,  0.026  GRAM  AND  OVER. 


21211 

21705 

39506 

49905 

55608 

55909.... 

57.508 

58505 

72405... 


0.02806 
.02659 
.02869 
.02939 


.03050 
.03177 
.02730 


10 

58 
67 
23 

837 
302 
3SO 
273 
213 


0.2806 

1.5420 

1.9218 

.6760 

22. 5848 
9.2120 

12.0728 
7.4516 
8.4415 


3.15  !  0. 000«F39   0.00884 


2.45 
2.93 
3.62 
2.31 
2.30 
2.21 
2.95 
3.36 


.0006514 
.0008404 
.0010640 
.0006236 
.00u7016 
.0007021 
. 0008052 
.0013316 


. 03778 
.05631 
.02436 
.52194 
.21187 
. 26680 
.21982 
. 2S31 13 


Average.   .02988.  240.3    7.2425  i   2.81   .0008449    .18126 


2.06 


1.66 
2.05 


1.92 


0.000591; 


.00050b3 
.0006513 


.0005829 


. 15292 
. 24750 


. 14607 


><>MK    1'ROPKRTIKS    OF    THE    WHEAT    KERNEL. 


71 


TABLE  11. — Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  kernel. 

Crop  of  1903. 


Per- 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Per 
cent- 
age  of 

Gliadin-plus- 

glutenin  nitro- 
gen (gram)  in- 

R;mgeof 

\vi-ii_rhts  of 
krrnol 

on). 

Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 

Wright 

of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 

Num- 
ber cf 
kernels. 

Weight 
of  ker- 
nels 
(grams). 

age  of 
pro- 
teid  ni- 
trogen 
in  ker- 

! 

Average      Ker- 
kernel.       nels. 

din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 

Average 
kernel. 

Ker- 
nels. 

nels. 

gen  m 

ker- 

nels. 

0  000  to  0.010.  . 

4 

0.00915 

219 

2.0334 

2.76 

0.0002528   0.05618 

1.97 

0.0001877 

0.05312 

0.010  to  0.012.. 

6 

.01118       179 

2.0187 

2.98     .0003326     .06276 

2.69 

.0002968 

.06752 

0.012  to  0.014.. 

19 

.01323       155.7 

2.0510 

3.12     .0004120     .06687 

1.98 

.  0002641 

.07489 

0.014  to  0  016.. 

27 

.0151ti 

3.5480 

3.00     .0004555     .10619 

•  1.76 

.  0002805 

.09320 

0  016  to  0.018.. 

69 

.01709       305.9 

5.2055 

2.93      .0005020     .14618 

2.07 

.0003519 

.13548 

0.018  to  0  020.. 

103 

.01901        349.6 

6.6327 

2.88     .0005476     .18039 

2.08 

.  0003979 

.15541 

0020  to  0.022.. 

64 

.02085       386.6 

8.1257 

2.60  !  .0005422      .20510 

1.92 

.0003999 

.  17351 

0022  to  0024.. 

42 

.02285       388.1 

8.8879 

2.90 

.0006624     .25166 

1.74 

.0004011 

.  15515 

ii(r.'4  to  0.026  . 

13 

.02511 

316.7 

7.9866 

2.86 

.0007154      .22816 

1.85 

.0004654 

.16903 

0.026  and  over 

9 

.02988 

240.3 

7.2425 

2.81 

.0008449     .18126 

1.92 

.0005829 

.14667 

With  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the  kernel,  as  shown  by  this 
table,  there  is  an  irregular  increase  in  the  number  of  kernels  on  the 
plant  up  to  a  point  somewhat  beyond  the  kernel  of  average  weight, 
after  which  there  is  a  decrease.  The  weight  of  the  kernels  on  the 
plant  seems  to  follow  the  same  rule.  The  percentage  of  proteid 
nitrogen  in  the  kernels  decreases,  in  general,  with  the  weight  of  the 
average  kernel,  while  the  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in 
the  average  kernel  increases  steadily.  The  grams  of  proteid  nitro- 
gen in  all  the  kernels  on  the  plant  increase  up  to  the  same  point  as 
do  the  number  of  kernels  on  the  plant,  and  then  decrease. 

Table  12  shows  the  summary  of  the  analyses  of  the  crop  of  1903, 
ananged  according  to  the  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average 
kernel.  All  plants  having  less  than  0.0003  gram  of  proteid  nitro- 
gen form  the  first  class,  and  the  following  classes  increase  with  each 
0.0001  gram  of  proteid  nitrogen. 

It  is  difficult  to  trace  any  relation  between  the  grams  of  proteid 
nitrogen  in  tho  aveiage  kernel  and  the  number  of  kernels  on  the  plant, 
or  the  weight  of  the  kernels  on  the  plant.  The  weight  of  the  average 
kernel  increases  directly  with  the  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the 
kernel.  The  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  increases  regularly 
with  an  increase  in  the  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average 
kernel.  The  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  all  the  kernels  on  the  plant 
>how  no  definite  relation  to  the  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the 
average  kernel. 

It  becomes  evident  from  these  results  that  selection  of  large, 
heavy  kernels  for  seed  would  result  in  discarding  the  immature 
and  unsound  kernels,  but  that  there  would  also  be  discarded  many 
sound  kernels,  which,  although  small  and  of  low  specific  graviry. 
would  contain  a  high  percentage  of  proteids. 


72 


IMPEOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


Another  effect  of  such  selection,  as  indicated  by  the  foregoing 
results,  would  be  to  increase  the  yield  of  grain  from  each  plant 
when  grown  under  the  conditions  that  obtained  in  these  experi- 
ments. What  the  effect  would  be  upon  the  yield  under  ordinary 
field  conditions  these  experiments  do  not  indicate. 

On  the  other  hand,  selection  based  upon  percentage  of  proteid 
nitrogen  alone  would  not  result  in  securing  plants  of  greatest  yield 
when  raised  under  these  conditions.  It  would,  moreover,  not  result 
in  obtaining  plants  producing  the  greatest  amount  of  proteid  nitro- 
gen, nor  even  of  kernels  containing  the  largest  quantity  of  proteid 
nitrogen. 

TABLE  12. — Summary  of  analyses  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen 
in  average  Icernel.     Crop  of  1903. 


Range  of  proteid  nitrogen  in 
average  kernel  (gram). 

M  a 

*ssr  ~£ 

(gram). 

Number 
of  ker- 
nels on 
plant. 

Weight  (in  grams) 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 

Kernels 
on  plant. 

Average 
kernel. 

Below  0  00030 

0.0002509 
.0003602 
.0004537 
.0005406 
.0006409 
.0007430 
.0008538 
.0009588 
.0011578 

14 
42 
80 
116 
59 
24 
9 

11 

257.9 
266.7 
409.2 
341.5 
310.3 
204.9 
189.1 
591.0 
244.9 

3.9190 
4.6742 
7.5309 
6.  7159 
6.  7257 
4.5158 
4.2480 
14.  6802 
6.6082 

0.01364 
.01628 
.01811 
.01908 
.02137 
.02110 
.02334 
.02484 
.02875 

1.96 
2.31 
2.54 
2.86 
3.07 
3.66 
3.79 
3.86 
4.62 

0-06531 
.  09644 
.  18644 
.  18440 
.19805 
.  15318 
.  15944 
.56666 
.27980 

0  00030  to  0  00040 

0  00040  to  0  00050  

0  00050  to  0  00060 

0  00060  to  0  00070 

0  00070  to  0  00080     

0  00080  to  0  00090 

0  00090  to  0  00100 

0  00100  and  over                   .     .  . 

It  will  be  shown  later  that  the  determination  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin 
nitrogen  is  a  safer  guide  to  the  bread-making  value  of  wheat  than  is 
a  determination  of  proteid  nitrogen,  but  whether  selection  should  be 
based  upon  the  percentage  of  nitrogen  or  the  total  production  of 
nitrogen  by  the  plant,  or  upon  the  amount  contained  in  the  average 
kernel,  is  a  question  that  can  not  be  solved  except  by  trial  under  field 
conditions. 

Some  results  of  experiments  with  light  and  with  heavy  seed  con- 
ducted on  large  field  plots  for  several  years  may  throw  some  light 
on  this  subject,  and  are  given  herewith. 

YIELD  OF  NITROGEN  PER  ACHE. 

.  It  is  important  to  know  whether  the  absolute  amount  of  nitro- 
gen per  acre  of  grain  raised  is  greater  in  light  or  in  heavy  wheat. 

If  the  absolute  amount  of  nitrogen  per  acre  is  less  in  light  than 
in  heavy  wheat  the  supposition  would  be  justifiable  that  the  kernels 
were  immature  or  had  been  prematurely  checked  in  their  develop- 
ment. On  the  other  hand,  if  the  amount  of  nitrogen  per  acre  is 
greater  in  the  light  wheat  it  would  be  reasonable  to  suppose  that,  as 
both  had  been  raised  under  the  same  conditions,  the  light  wheat  had, 
in  part  at  least,  come  from  plants  that  possessed  greater  ability  to 
acquire  and  elaborate  nitrogenous  material. 


YIELD  OF  NITROGEN  PER  ACRE. 


73 


To  afford  information  on  this  point  analyses  were  made  of  crops 
grown  from  light  and  from  heavy  seed.  Records  of  the  yields  of  the 
pints  were  kept  in  each  case  so  that  the  actual  amount  of  proteid 
nitrogen  contained  in  an  acre  of  each  kind  of  wheat  can  be  calculated. 
The  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  1 ,000  kernels  of  each  seed 
and  crop  sample  is  also  stated.  The  first  samples  separated,  Nos.  78 
and  79  of  the  Turkish  Red  variety  and  80  and  81  of  the  Big  Frame 
variety,  were  taken  from  seed  that  had  never  before  been  treated 
in  this  way.  When  planted  they  produced  the  crops  indicated  in 
Table  13  by  78b,  79b,  80b,  and  81b,  respectively.  Each  of  these 
crops  was  then  separated  into  two  portions,  of  which  the  light  portion 
of  the  light  wheat  \VSLS  retained  for  analyzing  and  planting,  and  the 
heavy  portion  of  the  heavy  wheat  likewise  retained.  Thus  No.  383 
is  the  light  portion  of  No.  78b,  and  No.  384  is  the  heavy  portion  of 
No.  79b. 

The  accuracy  of  the  records  of  relative  yields  of  light  and  heavy 
seed  harvested  in  1902  being  open  to  suspicion,  samples  of  the  same 
seed  were- sown  again  in  the  autumn  of  1902  and  harvested  in  1903. 
The  results  from  this  test  are  stated  at  the  bottom  of  the  table  under 
the  heading  "Check  experiment." 

These  experiments  are  to  be  understood  as  duplicating  those  of 
1902,  which,  as  regards  the  relative  yield  of  light  and  heavy  wheat, 
should  be  accurate,  although  tried  in  1903.  The  difference  between 
this  check  experiment  and  the  regular  one  of  1903  is  that  in  the 
check  experiment  the  seed  of  the  crop  of  1901  was  used,  while  in  the 
regular  experiment  in  1903  the  seed  of  the  crop  of  1902  was  used. 

TABLE  13. — Crops  grown  from  light  and  from  heavy  seed  for  four  years. 
SEED. 


Farm 
num- 
ber. 

Variety. 

Percentage  of-                ^.^  Qf 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  1,000 
kernels 
(gram). 

Relative 
weight. 

Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavv. 
Light. 
Heavy. 

Light. 
Heavy. 
Light. 
Heavy. 

Total       Proteid 
nitrogen,  nitrogen. 

Xon-       WtfTker- 

•SSgl;  « 

78 
79 
80 
81 
383 
384 
385 
386 

957 
956 
952 
9.53 

Turkish  Red 

17  24 

do  

30.  fi3 

Big  Frame 

2.45            2.00 
2.20             1.96 
3.  12       ,     3.  10 
3.02            2.93 
3.13            2.82 
2.95            2.65 

0.45  15.57 
.24  28.56 
.02  27.11 
.09  28.47 
.31  27.11 
.30  28.09 

0.3120 
.5606 
.8401 
.8350 
.7642 
.7446 

do  

Turkish  Red 

do 

Big  Frame 

do 

Turkish  Red 

do 

Big  Frame  

do 

Turkish  Red 

3.33            2.87 
3.06            2.86 
2.88            2.63 

46 

do.  .  . 

.20 

Big  Frame 

.25 

do 

CHECK  EXPERIMENT. 

Turkish  Red 

do 

Big  Frame  . 

do  

' 

74 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  13. — Crops  grown  from  light  and  from  heavy  seed  for  four  years — Continued. 

CROP. 


o 

—    OQ 

& 

Variety. 

B 

-c^ 
.2 

Weight  per  bushel 
(pounds). 

Percentage  of— 

Proteid  nitrogen 
per  acre  (pounds). 

o  """" 

2 

*O  *—  ' 

Proteid  nitrogen 
in  1,000  kernels 
(gram). 

t 

1 
1 

It 

2 

I1 

2  . 

c 

2 

Nonproteid 
nitrogen. 

78 
79 
80 
81 
383 
384 
385 
386 

957 
956 
952 
953 

Turkish  Red 

23  0 

3.20 
3.08 
3.13 
2.81 
2.35 
2.11 
3.30 
2.46 
2.15 
1.98 
3.54 
2.44 

3.09 
2.94 
3.06 
2.59 
2.13 
1.94 
3.06 
2.24 
2.14 
1.87 
3.32 
2.21 

3.51 
2.18 
2.14 

0.11 
.14 
.07 
.22 
.22 
.17 
.24 
.22 
.01 
.11 
.22 
.23 

45.54 
52.04 
37.63 
39.01 
34.12 
34.11 
38.92 
37.22 
25.29 
20.20 

1900 
1900 
1900 
1900 
1901 
1901 
1901 
1901 
1902 
1902 
1902 
1902 

1903 
1903 
1903 
1903 

1903 
1903 
1903 
1903 

78b 
79b 
80b 
81b 
612 
613 
602 
603 
621 
614 
604 
611 

1240 
1239 
1248 
1249 

1245 
1243 
1252 

do 

29.5    .. 
20.5 

25.10 

0.  7379 

Big  Frame 

do 

25.1 

24.84 
26.19 
27.04 
23.89 
28.82 

.6423 
.5581 
.  5238 
.7409 
.6451 

Turkish  Red.  .  . 

26.  7     60.  5 
29.3     61.5 
21.2     58.0 
27.7     60.5 
19.7     57.0 
18.0     58.0 
Lost  
Lost  

do 

Big  Frame 

do  

Turkish  Red 

do  

19.  56 
26.41 

£2.12 
23.13 
19.82 
23.26 

.6494 
.5837 

.7764 
.5042 
.4241 
.4605 

do  

Turkish  Red 

25.6 

53.91 
27.86 
33.  13 
24.71 

36  34 

.do  

21.3 

Big  Frame  

25.8 
20  8 

do 

- 

1  98 

CHECK  EXPERIMENT. 

Turkish  Red                30.  9 

1  95 

do                           Si.  8 

1.64 
1.79 



31.29 
25.67 
23.52 

Big  Frame  

23.9 

94.  9 

do 

1  62 

Comparing  the  analyses  of  the  light  and  heavy  seed  in  this  table 
with  those  in  the  preceding  tables,  it  will  be  noticed  that  the  total 
and  proteid  nitrogen  are  both  uniformly  higher  in  the  light  seed. 
The  nonproteid  nitrogen  is  not  so  uniform  as  in  the  previous  analyses, 
but  the  general  tendency  is  the  same. 

In  the  crop  the  high  total  and  proteid  nitrogen  of  the  light  seed  is 
uniformly  transmitted.  There  is  no  uniformity  in  the  nonproteid 
nitrogen.  As  was  to  be  expected,  the  heavy  seed  produced  in  the 
first  two  years  the  largest  yields  per  acre.  The  quality  of  light  or 
heavy  weight  as  indicated  in  the  resulting  crop  by  weight  of  grain 
per  bushel  gave  some  indication  of  being  transmitted.  In  1900 
there  was  an  absence  of  data  on  the  subject,  but  in  1901  the  heavy 
seed  in  each  case  produced  grain  having  a  greater  weight  per  bushel 
than  did  the  light  seed. 

Turning  to  the  column  showing  the  absolute  amount  of  proteid 
nitrogen  produced  per  acre,  it  is  very  apparent  that  the  heavy  seed 
produced  in  1900  considerably  larger  amounts  of  proteid  nitrogen 
per  acre  than  did  the  light  seed,  but  in  1901  the  difference  was  very 
slightly  in  favor  of  the  light  wheat,  which  advantage  continued 
with  the  light  wheat  during  the  remaining  years. 


YIELD  OF  NITROGEN  PER  ACRE.  75 

It  would  seem  from  these  results  that  the  quality  of  lightness, 
with  its  correlated  qualities  of  high  total  and  proteid  nitrogen,  is 
hereditary.  The  question  then  arises,  Why  should  the  light  wheat 
accumulate  more  nitrogen  per  acre  than  the  heavy  wheat  after  the 
first  generation  ? 

A  possible  explanation  for  this  is  that  the  light  seed  from  the  first 
generation  contained  kernels  whoso  lightness  was  due  in  some  cases 
to  immaturity,  and  in  other  cases  to  the  individual  peculiarity  of  the 
plant  on  which  they  grew.  The  latter  class  transmitted  this  pecul- 
iarity in  the  crop,  while  the  former  became  less  conspicuous  with 
each  generation,  on  account  of  the  lesser  vitality  and  productiveness 
of  the  immature  seed. 

A  peculiar  feature  of  these  results  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the 
yield  of  grain  from  the  light  seed  approaches  each  succeeding  year 
more  nearly  in  quantity  to  that  obtained  from  the  heavy  seed  until, 
in  1903,  it  becomes  greater.  These  two  qualities  of  seed  were 
raised  on  plots  side  by  side,  and  every  precaution  was  taken  to  obtain 
an  accurate  estimate  of  the  yield  of  each.  While  it  is  probable  that 
the  results  for  1903  are  misleading,  it  is  certainly  significant  that  so 
little  difference  in  yield  exists  after  three  years'  selection  in  this  way. 
Instead  of  the  difference  between  the  light  and  heavy  seed  becoming 
greater  each  year  it  is  without  doubt  becoming  less. 

In  considering  the  relative  yields  of  the  light  and  heavy  wheat,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  seeding  was  done  with  a  drill  set  to 
deliver  1J  bushels  per  acre  of  ordinary  seed  wheat.  The  result 
would  be  to  deposit  a  larger  number  of  kernels  of  light  seed  per  acre 
than  of  heavy  seed.  In  a  season  like  that  of  1903,  when  the  rainfall 
was  large  and  the  weather  moderately  cool  until  harvest,  there 
might  be  an  advantage  resulting  from  the  thicker  seeding,  which 
may  account  for  the  greater  yield  from  the  light  seed  in  that  year. 

It  is  possible  that  the  same  cause  may  have  operated  in  other 
years  to  increase  the  yields  from  the  light  seed,  but  it  is  not  likely 
that  it  produced  a  very  marked  effect,  because  the  seeding  was  a  large 
one  for  Nebraska,  and,  the  wheat  being  sown  in  the  early  fall,  there 
was  abundant  opportunity  for  it  to  stool,  and  thus  equalize  the  stand. 
It  has  never  been  observed  that  there  was  any  difference  between 
the  plots  in  this  respect. 

Taking,  together,  the  results  of  1902,  which  show  a  decrease  in 
the  weight  of  the  kernels  on  a  single  head  as  the  content  of  proteid 
nitrogen  increases,  the  results  of  1903,  which  show  a  slight  decrease 
in  the  weight  of  the  kernels  from  the  plant,  accompanying  an  increase 
in  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen,  and  the  yields  of  the  light  and 
heavy  seed  for  the  four  years  beginning  with  1900,  there  would 
appear  to  be  a  slight  decrease  in  yield  of  grain,  accompanying  an 
increase  in  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen.  This  loss  in  yield  is 


76  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

not  sufficient  to  counteract  the  increase  in  nitrogen,  and  the  result 
is  to  increase  the  production  of  proteids  per  acre. 

Viewed  in  the  light  of  these  various  experiments,  the  selection  of 
large,  heavy  wheat  kernels  for  seed  does  not  appear  to  be  altogether 
unobjectionable,  as  in  this  case  it  resulted  in  a  decreased  production  of 
proteids  per  acre,  without  a  compensating  increase  in  the  yield  of  grain, 
when  continued  for  a  number  of  years.  On  the  other  hand,  the  selec- 
tion of  the  small,  light  seed  is  hardly  to  be  recommended.  In  fact, 
selection  based  upon  kernel  size  or  weight  is  not  a  satisfactory  method 
for  permanently  improving  wheat.  The  individual  plant  should  be 
taken  as  the  basis  for  selection,  and  very  large  numbers  should  be 
handled.  The  figures  in  Table  8  show  what  great  opportunity  there 
is  for  securing  not  only  kernels  of  high  nitrogen  content,  but  also 
plants  giving  at  the  same  time  an  increased  yield  of  grain  and  abun- 
dant production  of  proteids.  If  the  average  nitrogen  content  and 
yield  of  grain  by  plants  be  observed  in  this  table,  it  will  be  seen 
that  numerous  plants  may  be  selected  that  have  not  only  a  nitrogen 
content  above  the  average,  but  also  a  greater  yield  of  grain.  While, 
therefore,  it  is  probable  that  improvement  in  yield  of  grain  can  not 
be  effected  so  rapidly  where  it  is  combined  with  improvement  in 
nitrogen  content  as  if  the  latter  were  neglected,  yet  present  yields 
of  wheat  in  Nebraska  can  be  increased  at  the  same  time  that  the 
production  of  proteids  is  augmented. 

METHOD  FOR  SELECTION  TO  INCREASE  THE   QUANTITY   OF 
PROTEIDS  IN  THE  KERNEL. 

The  following  tables  show  the  results  of  analyses  of  a  total  of 
forty-eight  spikes  of  wheat.  In  the  case  of  each  spike  one  row  of 
spikelets,  for  instance,  row  No.  1,  was  analyzed,  and  the  other  row 
of  spikelets,  which  would  then  be  row  No.  2,  was  analyzed  sepa- 
rately. In  the  case  of  the  set  of  spikes  forming  Table  14  the  total 
organic  nitrogen  was  determined  in  both  lots,  and  in  the  set  com- 
prised by  Table  15  the  proteid  nitrogen  was  determined.  The  last 
column  shows  the  difference  between  the  nitrogen  content  of  the  two 
rows  of  kernels. 


SELECTION    TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    KERNEL. 


77 


TABLE  14. — Analyses  of  twenty-jive  spike*  of  wheat,  showing  their  total  organic  nitrogen. 


Number  of  spike. 

Percentage  of  total  organic 
nitrogen. 

Number  of  spike. 

Percentage  of  total  organic 
nitrogen. 

Rowl. 

Row  2. 

Differ- 
ence. 

Row  1.   !   Row  2. 

Differ- 
ence. 

1 

3.14 
2.97 
2.89 
2.99 
2.89 
2.82 
2.50 
3.13 
3.11 
2.76 
2.85 
3.2i> 
2.94 
3.45 

3.32 
3.15 
2.99 
3.21 
2.82 
2.81 
•2.  7ii 
3.11 
3.18 
2.80 
2.79 
3.07 
3.07 
3.67 

0.18 
.18 
.10 
.22 
.07 
.01 
.26 
.02 
.07 
.04 
.06 
.19 
.13 
.22 

18... 

2.83  !          2.79 
2.78  1          2.7B 
2.94             3.03 
2.98            2.89 
3.00            3.08 
2.84             2.  '17 
3.03            2.90 
2.65            2.79 
2.62            2.84 
3.02            3.18 
3.02            2.80 

0.04 
.02 
.09 
.09 
.08 
.17 
.13 
.14 
.22 
.16 
.22 

22 

•^ 

23 

24  

£ 

44 

9 

45 

10 

4ti  

11 

47 

t2 

48  

13 

49  . 

14 

50 

IT 

Average  . 

Hi 

.12 

17 

TABLE  15. — Analyses  of  twenty-three  spikes  of  wheat,  showing  their  percentage  of  proteid 

nitrogen. 


Percentage  of  proteid 


Percentage  of  proteid 


Number  of  spike. 

Row  1.       Row  2. 

Differ- 
ence. 

Row  1. 

Row  2. 

Differ- 
ence. 

4                                            2.90            3.12 

0.22 

34    . 

2.86 

3.02 

0.16 

5                                            2  97             2  86 

.11 

35 

2.33 

2.  .52 

.19 

20                                            2.  68             2.  79 

.11 

3?::: 

2.88 

2.85 

.03 

•'I                                             2  54             2.76 

.22 

37 

2.43 

2.45 

.02 

25   ...                                     2.42            2.53 

.11 

38  

3.15 

3.14 

.01 

26                                            2.42             2.50 

.08 

39 

3.46 

3.34 

.12 

27  3.01             2.91 

.10 

40  

2.45 

2.59 

.14 

28                                            2.35             2.71 

.36 

41 

2.73 

2.68 

.05 

29                                            2  72             2.75 

.03 

4° 

3.42 

3.61 

.19 

30  2.49             2.44 

.05 

43  

2.47 

2.57 

.07 

31                                             2  92             3  09 

17 

3'*                                            2  60  !          2.48 

.12 

\verage 

2.77 

2.82 

.11 

33  3.41             3.37 

.04 

It  will  readily  be  seen  that  the  analyses  of  the  rows  agree  very 
closely,  the  extreme  difference  being  0.22  per  cent,  and  the  average 
difference  being  0.12  per  cent,  in  the  total  nitrogen.  If,  therefore, 
one  row  of  spikelets  were  to  be  used  for  seed  and  the  other  were 
analyzed,  it  is  quite  evident  that  a  very  accurate  estimate  of  the 
nitrogen  content  of  the  kernels  used  for  seed  would  be  obtained.  In 
the  determination  of  proteid  nitrogen  there  is  an  extreme  'difference 
of  0.36  per  cent  in  one  case,  but  in  the  main  the  differences  are  small. 
As  will  be  shown  later,  the  variation  in  the  proteid  nitrogen  content 
of  individual  plants  is  so  great  that  even  this  maximum  difference 
would  cause  no  confusion  when  selecting  plants  for  reproduction. 

It  is  very  desirable  to  have  for  analysis  a  larger  .sample  than  can 
be  obtained  from  one  spike.  It  has  therefore  been  attempted  to 
ascertain  whether  a  sample  consisting  of  one-half  the  whole  number 
of  spikes  on  a  plant  would  afford  a  fair  estimate  of  the  composition 
of  the  other  kernels  on  the  remainder  of  the  spikes.  The  plants 
whose  spikes  were  analyzed  were  grown  in  hills  5  inches  apart 


78 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


each  way,  with  one  seed  in  each  hill.  Each  plant  was  harvested 
separately  and  the  spikes  from  each  placed  in  a  separate  envelope. 
The  following  table  gives  the  results,  lot  1  in  each  case  being  com- 
posed of  the  kernels  from  one-half  the  number  of  spikes  on  a  plant, 
and  lot  2  of  kernels  from  the  remaining  spikes. 

TABLE  16. — Analyses  of  twenty-one  plants,  showing  total  nitrogen  and  proteid  nitrogen. 


Number  of  plant. 

Percentage  of  total  nitrogen. 

Percentage  of  proteid 
nitrogen. 

Lot  1. 

Lot  2. 

Differ- 
ence. 

Lot  1. 

L  t2        Differ- 
ence. 

1.. 

2.65 
3.01 
3.01 
2.82 
3.06 
2.94 
2.84 
3.21 
2.98 
2.59 
2.81 
3.47 
2.61 
2.54 
2.71 
2.85 
2.99 
2.78 
2.78 
2.79 

2.91 
3.02 
2.83 
3.10 
2.97 
2.56 
3.03 
3.05 
2.87 
2.66 
2.62 
3.62 
2.54 
2.46 
2.87 
3.01 
3.13 
2.77 
2.80 
2.71 

0.26 
.01 
.24 
.28 
.09 
.38 
.19 
.16 
.11 
.07 
.19 
.15 
.07 
.08 
.16 
.16 
.14 
.01 
.02 
.08 

2.51 
2.77 
2.69 
2.63 
2.92 
2.51 
2.66 
2.83 
2.59 
2.34 
2.59 
3.04 
2.44 
2.25 
2.25 
2.73 
2.85 
2.61 
2.60 
2.51 

2.69 
2.76 
2.57 
2.83 
2.70 
2.42 
2.86 
2.84 
2.70 
2.57 
2.52 
3.35 
2.42 
2.29 
2.71 
2.75 
2.91 
2.33 
2.57 
2.48 

0.18 
.01 
.12 
.20 
.22 
.09 
.20 
.01 
.11 
.23 
.07 
.31 
.02 
.04 
.46 
.02 
.06 
.28 
.03 
.03 

2 

3  

4 

5  

7 

9  

10 

11  

12.. 

13 

14  

15 

16  

17 

18  

19 

20 

21  

Average 

.14 

.13 

The  above  table  shows  a  maximum  difference  of  0.38  per  cent  in 
the  content  of  total  nitrogen  of  the  two  lots  of  spikes  from  one  plant, 
and  of  0.46  per  cent  in  the  content  of  proteid  nitrogen.  The  aver- 
age difference  is  only  0.14  per  cent  and  0.13  per  cent,  respectively. 

These  tables  give  unmistakable  evidences  that  the  average  com- 
position of  a  spike  of  wheat  may  be  judged  from  the  analysis  of  a 
row  of  its  spikelets,  and  that  the  average  composition  of  all  of  the 
spikes  of  a  wheat  plant  is  shown  by  an  analysis  of  one-half  the  num- 
ber. In  practice  it  is  better  to  take  as  the  sample  for  analysis  one 
row  of  spikelets  from  each  spike,  and  the  remaining  row  of  spikelets 
from  each  spike  for  planting. 

In  order  to  ascertain  what  variation  occurs  between  the  several 
spikes  on  a  single  wheat  plant,  analyses  were  made  of  each  spike 
from  a  number  of  plants.  On  some  plants  there  were  more  spikes 
than  on  others,  but  every  spike  on  each  plant  was  analyzed.  In  the 
following  tabulation  of  these  analyses  the  percentage  of  proteid 
nitrogen  is  stated. 


SELECTION    TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    KERNEL. 


79 


TABLE  17. — Analyses  of  spikes  of  wheat,  showing  difference  in  proteid  nitrogen. 


Spike. 

Percentage  oi  proteid  nitrogen. 

Plant  23. 

Plant  24. 

Plant  25.   Plant  26. 

Plant  27. 

Plant  29. 

1 

2.33 
2.69 
2.37 
2.36 
2.15 
2.31 
2.09 
2.71 

2.46 
2.73 
2.35 
2.11 
2.19 
2.21 
2.53 

2.31 
2.36 
2.47 
2.59 
2.35 
2.39 
2.39 
2.60 
2.54 
2.83 

2.73 
3.02 
2.80 
2.60 
2.53 
2.37 
2.72 
2.37 
2.61 
2.45 

3.22 
3.24 
3.02 
3.31 

2.38 
2.60 
3.03 
3.00 
2.34 
2.71 
2.21 

2  

3   

4 

5 

6  

7 



g 

9. 

2.32 

2.60 
2.30 

10 

2.37 



Maximum  
Average  

2.69 
2.37 
2.09 

.60 

2.73 
2.37 
2.11 

.62 

2.83 
2.48 
2.31 

.52 

3.02 
2.62 
2.37 

.65 

3.31 
3.20 
3.02 

.29 

3.03 
2.57 
2.21 

.82 

Minimum  

Greatest  dif- 
ference   

These  results  show  that  there  may  be  large  differences  between 
the  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  spikes  on  the  same  plant.  They  do 
not,  however,  indicate  that  the  determination  of  the  average  com- 
position of  the  kernels  on  a  plant  is  not  a  safe  guide  for  selecting 
breeding  stock.  If  the  plant  is  the  unit  in  reproduction,  whether  the 
plant  reproduces  itself  from  one  seed  or  another  does  not  affect  its 
hereditary  qualities  in  very  marked  degree. 

It  is  evident,  from  a  comparison  of  the  variations  that  occur  in  the 
composition  of  the  spikes  from  a  single  plant,  and  of  the  kernels  on  a 
single  spike,  that  it  is  impossible  to  do  more  than  obtain  a  reasonably 
close  estimate  of  the  composition  of  the  kernels  either  on  a  part  or  on 
the  w^hole  of  a  plant.  It  therefore  becomes  desirable  to  obtain  as 
closely  as  possible  the  average  composition  of  the  unit  of  reproduction. 
If  the  plant  as  a  whole,  and  not  any  particular  part,  is  this  unit,  the 
average  composition  of  all  of  the  kernels  on  the  plant  is  a  much  safer 
guide  as  a  basis  for  selection  than  is  the  average  composition  of  the 
kernels  of  any  part  of  it.  One  row  of  spikelets  from  each  spike 
should  therefore  give  the  best  sample  for  analysis. 

In  Table  18  is  given  a  statement  of  the  percentage  of  proteid 
nitrogen  in  the  dry  matter  of  the  kernels  on  a  row  of  spikelets  of  800 
spikes  of  wheat  of  the  Turkish  Red  variety.  These  spikes  were  taken 
from  a  field  of  wheat,  and  were  selected  with  reference  to  length  of 
head,  plumpness  of  kernel,  uprightness  of  straw,  freedom  from  rust, 
etc.  They  are  therefore  not  spikes  in  which  high  nitrogen  content  is 
likely  to  be  due  to  immaturity  or  arrested  development/'  Variations 
in  the  nitrogen  content  of  different  plants  may  in  some  degree  be  due 
to  a  larger  or  smaller  supply  of  available  nitrogen,  although  all  were 
taken  from  the  same  field.  Variations  due  to  climate  are,  of  course, 
precluded,  as  all  grew  during  the  same  season. 

« In  practice  undeveloped  kernels  are  discarded. 


80 


IMPKOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  18. — Variations  in  content  of  proteids. 


Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Record 
number. 

Percentage  of  — 

Record 
number.  - 

Percentage  of  — 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 

N.x  5.7). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 
N.x  5.7). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 
N.x  5.7). 

1 

2.25 
3.04 
2.45 
3.14 
2.86 
2.83 
3.67 
3.42 
2.36 
2.28 
2.98 
3.51 
3.63 
2.48 
2.30 
3.48 
3.55 
3.31 
2.30 
2.52 
2.93 
3.25 

12.82 
17.33 
13.96 
17.90 
16.30 
16.  13 
20.92 
19.49 
13.45 
13.00 
16.99 
20.01 
20.69 
14.14 
13.11 
19.84 
20.23 
18.87 
13.11 
14.36 
16.70 
18.52 

78 

3.40 
3.33 
3.79 
3.63 
2.68 

19.38 
18.98 
21.60 
20.69 
15.28 

155 

1.99 
3.03 
2.07 
2.75 
2.82 
3.06 
2.54 
3.33 
2.73 
2.47 
3.22 
2.80 

11.37 
17.20 
11.87 
15.64 
16.07 
17.44 
14.48 
18.98 
15.56 
14.08 
18.35 
15.96 

2  

79  

156 

3  .   . 

80 

157 

4 

81 

158 

5  

82     . 

159 

6 

83 

160 

7... 

84  

2.46 
2.62 
2.87 
2.89 
2.44 
3.56 
3.76 

14.02 
14.93 
16.49 
16.86 
13.91 
20.29 
21.43 

161... 
162 

8  .   .       .   . 

85 

9 

86 

163 

10  

87  .. 

164 

11 

88 

165  

166...  
167 

12 

89 

13  

90 

14 

91 

168 

3.59 
2.52 
2.72 
3.28 
2.74 
3.07 
3.75 
3.46 
3.09 
3.56 

20.46 
13.72 
15.50 
18.70 
15.62 
17.54 
21.43 
19.74 
17.67 
20.34 

15  

92  

93 

3.41 
2.30 

19.44 
13.11 

169 

16 

170 

17  

94 

171. 

18  

95  •  ;;;  ; 

172 

19 

96 

2.75 
4.07 
3.28 
3.24 
2.15 
3.12 
3.00 
2.87 
3.58 
2.61 
2.01 
2.68 
3.10 
2.58 
2.76 
4.30 
2.89 
2.59 
2.68 
1.71 
2.59 
3.31 

15.67 
23.20 
18.70 
18.47 
12.25 
17.  78 
17.10 
16.36 
20.41 
14.88 
11.46 
15.28 
17.67 
14.71 
15.73 
24.51 
16.47 
14.67 
15.28 
9.75 
14.75 
18.87 

173 

20  

97  

174 

21 

98 

175 

22... 

99  

176  

23..   . 

100     

177 

24 

2.84 
2.73 
3.55 
2.33 
2.65 
2.82 
2.70 
1.84 
3.10 
2.86 
2.16 
2.58 
3.22 
3.49 
2.76 
2.96 
2.86 
3.50 
3.05 
2.88 
2.75 
2J51 
2.50 
3.10 
3.17 
2.86 
2.80 
3.65 
2.88 
3.21 
2.96 
3.84 
3.38 
3.11 
3.21 
3.06 
3.02 
1.78 
2.67 
3.39 
2.49 
2.58 
2.12 
2.64 
2.46 
2.35 
2.93 
2.32 
2.20 
2.58 
2.58 
3.22 

16.19 
15.56 
20.23 
13.28 
15.11 
16.07 
15.39 
10.49 
17.67 
16.30 
12.31 
14.71 
18.  35 
19.89 
15.73 
16.87 
16.30 
19.95 
17.38 
16.42 
15.67 
14.88 
14.25 
17.67 
18.07 
16.30 
15.96 
20.80 
16.42 
18.30 
16.87 
21.89 
19.27 
17.  73 
18.30 
17.44 
17.21 
10.13 
15.22 
19.32 
14.19 
14.71 
12.08 
15.05 
14.02 
13.39 
16.70 
13.22 
12.  ,54 
14.71 
14.71 
18.  35 

101 

178 

25  

102  

179     . 

3.85 
3.57 
2.66 
2.76 
2.05 
3.77 
2.70 
3.97 
2.98 
2.36 
2.63 
3.24 
3.24 
3.12 
2.40 
3.43 
3.33 
2.71 
2.85 
3.18 
2.98 
3.23 

21.95 
20.38 
15.18 
15.74 
11.73 
21.53 
15.43 
22.63 
17.03 
13.48 
15.03 
18.52 
18.52 
17.80 
13.72 
19.58 
18.99 
15.  46 
16.27 
18.13 
17.03 
18.46 

26 

103 

180 

27... 

104  

181  

28  . 

105  

182 

29 

106 

183 

30  

107  

184.   . 

31 

i  108 

185... 
186' 

32 

109 

33 

no  

187 

34... 
35  

Ill 

188 

112  

189.   . 

36 

113 

190... 
191  

37... 

114  
115  

38  . 

192 

39 

116 

193  
194  

40  

117  

41 

I  118 

195 

42 

!  119 

2.17 
2.88 

12.37 
16.42 

196 

43  . 

120  

197  

44... 
45  

121 

198 

122  
123....... 

1.33 

2.54 
3.20 
2.04 
2.34 
2.89 
2.98 
2.85 
'2.99 
3.18 

7.58 
14.48 
18.24 
11.63 
13.34 
16.47 
16.99 
16.24 
17.04 
18.13 

199  

46     ' 

200 

47 

124 

201 

48  

125  

202  

3.12 
3.07 
3.90 
2.41 
3.44 
2.73 
3.20 
3.81 
2.94 

2^96 
3.30 
3.09 
3.79 
3.33 
2.86 
2.58 
2.71 
3.19 
3.98 
2.93 
3.30 
3.65 
3.54 
3.11 
2.71 
3.39 
2.96 
2.54 
3.11 

17.83 
17.51 
22.24 
13.74 
19.62 
15.58 
18.30 
21.76 
16.79 
16.  52 
16.91 
18.86 
17.62 
21.63 
18.99 
16.30 
14.72 
15.45 
•8.22 
22.70 
16.71 
18.86 
20.82 
20.  23 
17.73 
15.46 
19.36 
16.88 
14.46 
17.73 

49 

126     .... 

203 

50 

127 

204 

51 

128  

205.       .   .   . 

52 

129 

206 

53  

130  

207  

54 

131  

132 

208 

55 

209 

56  .       . 

133 

210  

57 

134     .            1 

211 

58 

135                 1 

212 

59  . 

136  

213  

60 

137 

2.13 
3.08 
1.37 

12.14 
17.56 
7.81 

214  

61 

138 

215 

62 

139  

216  

63 

140 

217  

64 

141 

2.57 
2.75 
3.03 
3.17 
2.09 
2.75 
2.42 
2.68 
2.25 
2.61 
1.51 
1.64 
2.93 
2.85 

14.65 
15.67 
17.27 
18.07 
11.91 
15.67 
13.79 
15.28 
12.82 
14.88 
8.61 
9.35 
16.70 
16.24 

218 

65 

142  

219  

66 

143 

220 

67... 

144  
145  

221... 

68  . 

222  

69... 
70 

146 

223 

147 

224 

71 

148  

225  

72  
73  

149 

226 

1.50  
151  

227  

74 

228  

75 

152 

229 

76 

153  

230  

77... 

154... 

,  231... 

SP:LECTION  TO  INCREASE  PROTEIDS  IN  KERNEL. 


81 


TAHI.F.   IS.  — r«ria/ww.v  in  content  <>f  proteids — Continued. 


Percentage  of—     1 

Percentage  of— 

Percentage  ol  — 

Record       ™g* 
number      g«J^L 
free 
material 

Proteids 
(proteid 

' 

Record 
number. 

Proteid 
nitrogen    Proteids 
in  water-    (proteid 
free         N.  x  5.7). 
material. 

Record 
number. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 
N.X5.7). 

232                           3.11 

17.73 
18.92 
18.43 
20.82 
18.17 
27.  79 
15.  38 
14.77 
20.12 
15.75 
16.89 
19.78 
18.83 
20.77 
21.39 
19.95 
20.78 
18.32 
17.76 
19.73 
14.52 
2<».71 

309. 

3.74 
3.15 
2.99 
3.48 
3.52 
3.16 
2.75 
3.35 
3.42 
2.01 
2.86 
2.98 
3.42 
2.54 
3.42 
3.18 
3.45 

21.36 
18.01 
17.07  ! 
19.88  i 
20.11  ! 
18.03  ' 
15.68 
19.13 
19.54 
11.50  i 
16.33  i 
17.00 
19.54 
14.53 
19.54 
18.16 
19.70 

386... 

2.52 
2.73 
3.05 
2.95 
3.22 
3.26 
2.93 
2.70 
2.77 
2.98 
2.28 

15.07 
15.59 
17.41 
16.87 
18.36 
18.60 
16.74 
15.41 
15.81 
16.99 
13.02 

233                           3  31 

310 

387  

3.23 

311  

388  

"•}.->                           3.  65 

312 

389... 

3.18 
2.37  4.87 
238                           2  69 

313 

390  

314  
315 

391 

392  

239                           2.59 

i  316... 

393  

>m                     3  52 

317 

394 

°4l                           2  76 

318... 
319  

395  .. 

242  2.96 

396  

243  3.47 
044                             3  30 

320  
321... 
322  

397  
398 

21:.  3.64 

246  3.75 
•'47                             3  50 

399  
400  

3.09 
3.35 
3.36 
2.32 
3.03 
3.30 
3.75 
2.43 
3.79 
3.63 
3.59 
3.26 
3.15 
3.63 
3.77 
3.13 
2.44 
3.23 
3.79 
3.05 
2.85 
3.73 
2.53 
!           3.  53 
;          3.14 
1          2.61 
3.29 
3.08 
:          3.06 
2.59 
3.03 
2.81 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
2.85 
3.53 
2.88 
3.12 
2.66 
2.98 
2.35 
2.93 
3.22 
2.50 
2.37 
2.37 
3.75 
2.86 
3.13 
2.76 
3.61 
2.92 
3.17 
3.15 
3.14 
2.62 
2.71 
3.14 
3.18 
2.60 
3.91 

17.65 
19.12 
19.20 
13.26 
17.31 
18.83 
21.43 
13.90 
21.63 
20.74 
20.47 
18.63 
17.95 
20.70 
21.51 
17.89 
13.93 
18.44 
21.65 
17.39 
16.28 
21.27 
14.  45 
20.12 
17.90 
14.93 
18.81 
17.60 
17.46 
14.80 
17.  31 
16.06 
1  v  28 
17.11 
17.80 
16.28 
20.14 
16.44 
17.82 
15.20 
16.99 
13.44 
16.72 
17.98 
14.30 
13.56 
13.51 
21.37 
16.33 
16.67 
15.76 
20.62 
16.68 
18.07 
1  7.  '.  .1 
17.92 
14.95 
15.47 
17.92 
18.20 
14.84 
22.29 

323 

324 

401 

24  v..                       3.64 
249                           3  *'l 

325. 

402  

326 

403. 

250  3.11 
251                           3  46 

327 

3.44 
3.60 
2.87 
2.61 

i9.64 
20.55 
16.39 
14.93 

404 

328 

405  

2.54 
"">:•!                           3  63 

329 

406 

330  

407  

2i{           

331  

408  

2.").')                             3.  02 

17.26 
18.88 

332  
333  
334 

2.57 
3.25 
2.61 
2.81 
3.35 
2.88 
4.95 
3.33 
2.73 
2.97 
2.60 
2.50 
2.93 
2.55 
2.55 
2.  44 
2.87 
2.65 
2.63 
3.31 
3.04 
3.10 
2.72 
2.83 
2.91 
2.36 
2.33 
2.97 
2.88 
2.94 
3.03 
3.49 
2.91 
3.49 
3.16 
3.37 
3.06 
3.33 
3.09 
2.98 
3.30 
2.86 
3.15 
3.40 
2.59 
3.46 
2.74 
3.09 
2.35 
3.45 
3.22 
2.96 
3.55 
3.79 

14.68 
18.56 
14.92 
15.70 
19.11 
16.45 
28.23 
19.01 
15.61 
16.94 
14.82 
14.27 
16.71 
14.57 
14.  55 
13.92 
16.39 
15.18 
15.03 
18.90 
17.38 
17.72 
15.53 
16.18 
16.61 
13.47 
13.60 
16.95 
16.45 
16.77 
17.28 
19.89 
16.62 
19.94 
18.04 
19.23 
17.47 
19.02 
17.64 
17.04 
18.  S4 
16.33 
17.97 
19.89 
14.76 
19.76 
15.65 
17.64 
13.42 
19.67 
18.40 
16.88 
20.26 
21.62 

409  

256                           3  31 

410  

257 

411 

258  3.37 
259                           3  84 

19.24 
21.89 
11.03 
19.92 
18.21 
18.48 
19.20 
18.80 
17.70 
18.18 
23.39 
18.29 
19.19 
19.34 
17.88 
19.78 
20.34 
18.96 
17.95 
16.26 
17.77 
21.60 
21.10 
18.60 
17.19 
22.00 
21.20 
B.W 
20.26 
22.  04 
16.09 
14.40 
22.81 
12.73 
23.68 
15.04 
14.60 
17.41 
22.44 
11.85 

335 

412 

336 

413  

260                           1.93 

337  

414  

261                           3  49 

338  

415  

262                           3  19 

339 

416 

263                           3.24 

340... 

417  

264                           3  36 

341 

418     

265                           3.29 

342  

343.   .   .   . 

419  

266                           3  10 

420  

°67                           3  18 

344 

421 

268                           4.10 

345... 

422.:  

269                           3  20 

346 

42'}  

270                           3  36 

347 

424 

'71                            3.39 

348  

425  

°7  '                           3  13 

349 

426. 

•11.  \                           3.  39 

350... 
351  

i  427  
1  428  

'74                             3.56 

•'75                           3  32 

352 

!  429 

976                           3  15 

353 

4;0 

277                           2.85 

354.   .   .   . 

431  

278                           3  11 

432 

279...                      3.78 
280                           3.70 

356 

433 

357 

434. 

281                            3  26 

i    358 

435 

282                           3.01 

1    359  

436  

437 

283                           3.85 

360 

284                           3.71 

361  

438... 

2S5...                      3.87 
286                           3  55 

362 

439. 

363  
364  

365 

440 

287                           3.86 

441  

288                           2.  82 

442 

289.   .   .   . 

366  

j  443  

290                           4.00 

367. 

i  444. 

291                           2  23 

368 

445  
446  

292.                           4.15 

369  

293                           2.63 

370 

447 

-N».       ...               2.56 

371... 

448... 

3.05 

:*72 

449  
450 

296                           3.93 

373 

297...                      1.99 

374... 

451... 

298... 

375 

4.-.2  
453 

299                           3.67 

20.96 
17.40 
17.61 
15.28 

376 

300                           3  06 

377 

454 

301  3.08 
302  2.68 
303 

378.... 
,  379... 
380 

455  

456 

457  
45*  

304  2.23 

12.71 
17.52 
14.30 
18.20 
16.22 

381  
3*2  
!  383 

3.  07 
306  2..V) 
307                           3.  19 




46] 

308...                     2.M 

4(12... 

2.39 

13.  64 

27889— No.  78—05 6 


82 


IMPEOV1NG    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  18. — Variations  in  content  of  proteids — Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Percentage  of  — 

Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 
N.  x  5.7). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 

N.  X  5.7). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 
N.  x  5.7). 

463 

2.49 
1.98 
3.32 
2.98 
2.89 
2.95 
2.74 
2.80 
2.24 
2.49 
2.76 
2.80 
2.95 
2.52 
2.95 
3.15 
2.27 
2.72 
3.04 
3.15 
2.60 
3.45 
2.59 
2.68 
3.01 
2.41 
3.45 
2.46 
2.87 
2.06 
3.18 
2.45 
2.36 
2.52 
2.84 
2.82 
2.97 
3.06 
2.64 
2.72 
2.31 
3.06 
2.71 
2.49 
3.13 
2.89 
3.20 
2.93 
3.61 
2.71 
2.86 
2.41 
2.27 
3.28 
2.36 
3.64 
2.81 
2.54 
2.68 
3.12 
2.99 
1.93 
2.51 
1.71 
3.15 
2.35 
2.88 
2.64 
2.97 
2.75 
3.22 
2.95 
3.03 
2.57 
2.88 
2.64 
3.76 

14.24 
11.29 
18.97 
17.01 
16.48 
16.82  ! 
15.62 
15.97 
12.79  ! 
14.  22  i 
15.78 
15.97  ! 
16.83  i 
14.39 
16.85 
18.00  ! 
12.96  ! 
15.53 
17.38 
17.97  i 
14.86 
19.71 
14.81 
15.31 
17.18 
13.77 
19.70 
14.02 
16.40 
11.78 
18.16 
13.97 
13.  45 
14.38 
16.21 
16.08 
16.95 
17.48 
15.09 
15.  56 
13.19 
17.48 
15.46 
14.24 
17.85 
16.51 
18.29 
16.71 
20.59 
15.45 
16.33 
13.79 
12.98 
18.75 
13.49 
20.75 
16.03 
14.48 
15.28 
17.79 
17.05 
11.04 
14.35 
9.79 
17.99 
13.42 
16.44 
15.06 
16.94 
15.  73 
18.37 
16.82 
17.29 
14.66 
16.47 
15.09 
21.46 

540 

3.17 
3.09 
3.33 
3.50 
1.29 
2.10 
2.54 
2.73 
3.01 
2.50 
2.84 
2.99 
2.30 
3.21 
2.91 
3.16 
3.02 
3.30 
3.25 
2.94 
3.32 
3.00 
1.12 
2.36 
3.83 

18.12 
17.66 
19.01 
19.96 
7.37 
11.98 
14.49 
15.59 
17.21 
14.30 
16.20 
17.08 
13.11 
18.35 
16.59 
18.06 
17.26 
18.86 
18.58 
16.78 
18.93 
17.13 
6.40 
13.49 
21.84 

617 

3.12 
2.67 
3.59 
2.68 
2.24 
3.19 
3.52 
2.67 
2.68 
2.69 
2.88 
3.68 
3.47 
2.48 
3.39 
3.22 
1.64 
2.10 
3.42 
3.08 
2.77 
3.54 
3.15 
2.82 
3.37 
2.57 
3.35 
3.41 
2.44 
3.77 
2.82 
2.53 
2.56 
2.59 

17.83 
15.27 
20.49 
15.30 
12.79 
18.23 
20.09 
15.27 
15.30 
15.38 
16.44 
21.01 
19.82 
14.16 
19.35 
18.41 
9.38 
11.99 
19.52 
17.61 
15.79 
23.21 
18.00 
16.10 
19.26 
14.68 
19.14 
19.47 
13.91 
21.54 
16.08 
14.47 
14.63 
14.82 

464  

465 

541 

618 

542  

619 

466  
467  

468 

543 

620  

621 

544  

545 

622 

469  

546  

623...  
624 

470 

547  

548 

471 

625 

472  

549  

626 

473 

550 

627 

474  

551  

628  

629 

475 

552  

476 

553 

630 

477... 

478 

554  

631. 

555 

632 

479  

480 

556  

633  

557  

634 

481 

558 

635 

482 

559  

636. 

483 

560 

637  

638 

484  

485 

561 

562. 

639 

486 

563 

640 

487 

564  

641 

488 

565 

642 

489 

566... 

3.49 
3.08 
2.17 
3.03 
3.20 
2.52 
3.12 
2.52 
3.25 
3.17 
2.52 
3.09 
2.73 
3.35 

19.49 
17.57 
12.39 
17.29 
18.27 
14.37 
17.82 
14.41 
18.53 
18.10 
14.40 
17.61 
15.60 
19.10 

643  

644 

490 

567  

568 

491 

645 

492 

569 

646 

493 

570. 

647  

648 

494 

571 

495  

496 

572  

649 

573. 

650  ... 
651 

497 

574  

498 

575. 

652..   ...... 
653..   ...... 
654  
655..   
656  
657 

2.83 
2.50 
2.59- 
3.21 
2.56 
2.55 

16.19 
14.31 
14.81 
18.30 
14.61 
14.57 

499 

576 

500 

577  

578. 

501 

502 

579 

503 

580  

504  

505 

581 

3.79 
2.59 
3.13 
3.49 
3.05 
3.27 
2.56 
2.83 
2.84 
2.86 
3.06 
3.20 
2.88 
3.32 
3.18 
3.09 
3.32 
2.34 
3.12 
2.97 
2.08 
3.64 
2.56 
2.53 
2.56 
3.13 
3.01 
3.05 
2.75 
3.51 
3.00 
3.26 
3.84 
2.77 
2.72 
3.72 

21.61 
14.77 
17.86 
19.91 
17.  40 
18.65 
14.60 
16.17 
16.20 
16.  31 
17.44 
18.29 
16.47 
18.93 
18.17 
17.66 
18.93 
13.39 
17.81 
16.97 
11.91 
20.77 
14.62 
14.45 
14.60 
17.85 
17.20 
17.41 
15.72 
20.05 
17.15 
18.62 
21.92 
15.79 
15.52 
21.22 

658 

582  

659 

2.92 
3.26 
2.55 
2.50 
2.82 
2.80 
3.33 
2.35 
2.31 
2.50 
4.36 
6.33 
2.32 
4.82 
3.39 
3.24 
3.41 
3.11 
2.51 
3.09 
2.48 
2.30 
3.36 
2.49 
2.70 
3.59 
4.04 
2.79 
2.83 
2.65 
2.68 
3.38 
3.04 
2.81 
2.35 

16.70 
18.60 
14.  56 
14.26 
16.11 
15.98 
19.01 
13.40 
13.20 
14.30 
24.86 
36.12 
13.23 
28.15 
19.  35 
18.48 
19.44 
17.73 
14.36 
17.65 
14.17 
13.13 
19.17 
14.20 
15.41 
20.51 
23.06 
15.90 
16.13 
15.12 
15.28 
19.26 
17.33 
16.04 
13.76 

506 

583. 

660 

507 

584 

661 

508 

585.   . 

662  

663 

509 

586 

510 

587  

664 

511 

588. 

665 

512 

589 

666 

513  -.. 
514  

590  

667 

591  
592  
593  
594  
595  

668  

515 

669      

516 

670 

517  

671  

518 

672  

519 

596. 

673 

520 

597 

674 

521 

598  

675  

522 

599. 

676 

523 

600 

677 

524 

601  

602 

i  678  

525 

679 

526 

!  603  

680  

527... 
528 

i  604 

681 

605 

682... 
683  

529 

606  

530 

!  607 

684. 

531.... 
532  . 

608 

685  
686  

609.. 

533 

610.... 
611  

687.. 

534... 

f  688... 

535 

"612 

689  

690 

536 

613 

537.. 

614... 
615 

691... 

538 

692.   . 

539... 

616... 

i  693... 

SELECTION    TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    KERNEL. 


83 


TABLE  18. — Variations  in  content  of  proteids — Continued. 


Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Record 
number. 

Percentage  of— 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  water- 
free 
material. 

Proteids 
(proteid 

1ST  x  5.  7). 

Proteid  ! 
nitrogen    Proteids 
in  water-    (proteid 
free        N.  x  5.7). 
material. 

Proteid 
nitrogen   Proteids 
in  water-  (proteid 
free        N.  x  5.7). 
material. 

I  '-4 

2.15 
2.92 

12.29 
16.69 

730.  .  . 

2.09 
3.18 
2.41 
2.06 
2.76 
2.09 
2.29 
1.61 
2.01 
2.85 
1.87 
1.75 
3.57 
2.63 
1.97 
2.98 
1.77 
2.79 
1.83 
2.29 
2.22 
3.48 
3.48 
1.33 
3.55 
2.43 
2.30 
2.14 
1.67 
2.14 
3.72 
2.47 
2.93 
2.02 
2.18 
2.20 

11.92 
18.18 
13.78 
11.  77 
15.73 
11.96 
13.09 
9.20 
11.44 
16.26 
10.71 
9.99 
20.36 
15.02 
11.23 
16.99 
10.10 
15.95 
10.44 
13.06 
12.66 
19.85 
19.87 
7.53 
20.29 
13.90 
13.15 
12.24 
9.54 
12.25 
21.21 
14.12 
16.72 
11.56 
12.47 
12.  57 

766... 

2.87 
2.22 
2.45 
2.37 
1.37 
1.62 
2.00 
1.73 
2.32 
1.88 
2.28 
2.80 
1.98 
2.35 
2.85 
2.79 
2.64 
2.81 
1.92 
2.25 
3.29 
2.95 
2.13 
2.20 
2.86 
3.02 
2.16 
2.32 
2.82 
2.48 
2.45 
2.20 
2.95 
2.18 
2.02 

16.41 
12.69 
13.98 
13.51 
7.86 
9.27 
11.42 
9.87 
13.26 
10.76 
13.  03 
16.02 
11.33 
13.40 
16.29 
15.94 
15.09 
16.02 
10.96 
12.88 
18.75 
16.82 
12.17 
12.57 
16.32 
17.22 
12.36 
13.24 
16.11 
14.15 
14.00 
12.56 
16.  £2 
12.48 
11.57 

li'l") 

731 

-767 

732 

768 

2.11 
3.03 
2.64 
4.10 
2.51 
2.27 
2.33 
2.43 
2.48 
1.87 
3.07 
2.12 
1.87 
2.10 
2.08 
2.61 
2.20 
2.16 
3.23 
2.77 
2.38 
3.14 
2.16 
1.80 
2.14 
2.16 
2.18 
2.04 
2.32 
2.19 
1.79 
2.49 
2.92 

12.07 
17.29 
15.09 
23.42 
14.33 
12,96 
13.34 
13.  94 
14.18 
10.69 
17.52 
12.09 
10.67 
12.00 
11.87 
14.88 
12.58 
12.32 
18.44 
15.81 
13.61 
17.91 
12.35 
10.29 
12.22 
12.36 
12.  43 
11.67 
13.26 
12.  52 
10.23 
14.22 
16.46 

733  

769  


699... 

7.34          

770.   . 

735.  .  . 
736  

771  
772  

700 

701  
702  

737 

77:1 

738... 
739  

774... 

703 

775  

704 

740 

776 

705. 

741... 

777... 

706 

742        ..   .. 

778.       . 

707 

743 

779 

708 

744  

780  

709  :. 
710 

745 

781 

746 

782 

711 

783 

712 

748 

784 

713  

749  

785  

714 

750 

786. 

715 

7.51 

787 

716. 

752  

788  

717 

753 

789 

718 

754 

790 

719 

755  

791  

720 

756 

792 

721  

7.57  

793... 

722 

758  
759 

794.  .  .  . 

723 

795 

724.... 

760  

796  

725 

761 

797  

798 

726  

727 

762 

763  

764 

799  

729 

800 

72!»  

765  

It  will  be  noticed  that  there  is  a  very  large  range  of  variation  in 
the  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  these  wheats,  running  from  1.12  to 
4.9.5  per  cent.  By  referring  to  Table  8,  it  will  be  seen  that  an  equally 
large  variation  occurred  between  the  plants  when  the  whole  plant 
was  sampled.  In  the  351  analyses  the  nitrogen  ranges  from  1.20  to 
5.85  per  cent.  This  is  due  in  the  main  to  the  ability  of  the  plant 
to  gather  nitrogen  from  the  soil.  In  no  one  of  the  experiments  to 
ascertain  the  effect  of  nitrogenous  manures  on  the  composition  of 
wheat  has  there  been  an  increase  of  more  than  a  few  tenths  of  1  per 
cent,  even  when  the  nitrogenous  fertilizer  was  added  to  an  exhausted 
soil.  It  is,  therefore,  not  likely  that  such  large  variation  in  nitrogen 
content  could  be  due  to  irregularities  in  the  supply  of  soil  nitrogen. 
II  this  ability  of  the  plant  to  store  up  a  large  amount  of  nitrogen  in 
the  kernel  is  hereditary,  as  results  given  later  indicate,  there  is  ample 
opportunity  to  develop  by  selection  a  strain  of  wheat  of  high  nitrogen 
content. 


84  IMPEOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

A    BASIS    FOB    SELECTION    TO    INCREASE     THE     QUANTITY    OF 
PROTEIDS  IN  THE  ENDOSPERM  OF  THE  KERNEL. 

White  bread  flour,  which  constitutes  the  major  portion  of  the 
wheat  flour  consumed  in  this  country,  is  derived  entirely  from  the 
endosperm  of  the  wheat  kernel.  The  portions  of  the  kernel  not 
entering  into  the  flour  are  the  germ  and  the  seed  coat,  attached  to 
each  of  which  discarded  constituents  are  portions  of  the  endosperm. 
The  larger  part  of  the  aleurone  layer  either  adheres  to  the  hull  and 
constitutes  the  "bran"  of  commerce,  or  appears  in  the  product 
known  as  "shorts,"  and  sometimes  in  low-grade  flour. 

As  it  is  the  flour  in  which  it  is  desired  to  increase  the  nitrogen, 
and  as  the  flour  consists  entirely  of  the  endosperm,  it  becomes  desir- 
able to  have  some  way  to  determine  the  nitrogen  content  of  the 
endosperm  alone  and  to  select  for  reproduction  plants  possessing  a 
large  amount  of  nitrogen  in  this  portion  of  the  kernel. 

It  is  a  question  how  this  can  best  be  done.  A  determination  of 
gluten  by  the  ordinary  method  of  washing,  to  carry  off  the  starch 
and  fiber  while  the  gluten  is  being  worked  in  the  hand,  is  not  well 
adapted  for  use  with  the  small  quantities  of  wheat  obtainable  from 
a  single  plant.  This  also  has  the  disadvantage  that  it  gives  no 
indication  as  to  the  quality  of  the  gluten. 

Determinations  of  gliadin  and  glutenin  promise  to  be  of  some  help 
in  affording  a  basis  for  selection  from  individual  plants.  It  has 
been  shown  by  Osborne  and  Voorhees"  that  the  gluten  of  wheat  is 
composed  of  gliadin  and  glutenin.  It  does  not  necessarily  follow, 
however,  that  the  sum  of  these  two  substances  is  a  measure  of  the 
gluten  content  of  the  sample  analyzed.  Osborne  and  Campbell b 
have  stated  that  the  embryo  of  the  wheat  kernel  does  not  contain 
either  gliadin  or  glutenin.  This  being  the  case,  the  sum  of  the 
gliadin  and  glutenin  would  represent  these  proteids  in  the  endosperm, 
with,  perhaps,  a  small  amount  in  the  hull. 

A  recent  investigation  by'Nasmithc  leads  him  to  conclude  that 
gliadin  exists  in  all  portions  of  the  endosperm,  including  the  aleu- 
rone layer,  but  that  glutenin  is  contained  only  in  the  starch-bearing 
portion  of  the  endosperm.  A  determination  of  glutenin  may,  there- 
fore, give  an  indication  of  the  gluten  content  of  the  wheat. 

Table  19  shows  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen,  the  sum  of 
the  gliadin  and  glutenin  nitrogen,  the  amounts  in  grams  of  proteid 
and  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel,  and  the 
grams  of  proteid  and  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  in  all  of  the 
kernels  on  each  plant.  The  plants  are  grouped  into  those  having 

"American  Che  in.  Jour.,  1893,  pp.  392-471. 

k  Connecticut  Experiment  Station  Report,  1899,  p.  305. 

c Trans.  Canad.  Inst.,  7  (1903),  Univ.  Toronto  Studies,  Physiol.  Ser.  (1903),  No.  4. 


SELECTION    TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    ENDOSPERM. 


85 


from  1  to  2  per  cent  proteid  nitrogen,  those  having  2  to  2.5  per  cent 
proteid  nitrogen,  etc.  Table  20  gives  the  averages  for  each  of  the 
groups  in  Table  19. 

TABLE  19. — Relation  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  to  proteid  nitrogen. 
1  TO  2  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


Record  number. 

Percentage 
of— 

Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 

Ker- 
nels. 

f 

Average 
kernel. 

f  eight  (in  grams)  c 

(iliadin- 
Proteid      plus- 
nitro-     glutenin 
gen  in       nitro- 
kornols.     gen  in 
kernels. 

)f— 

Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 

Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 

in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
averugt' 
kernel 

55307... 

1.89 
1.81 
1.98 

1.56 
1.77 
1.96 

342 
729 
465 

5.6864 
15.  7835 
9.7922 

0.  01663 
.02165 
.02106 

0.  10747     0.  08871 
.  28569       .  27937 
.  19388       .  19193 

0.  0003142 
.  0003919 
.0004170 

0.0002594 
.0003832 
.0004128 

80305      

81705 

Average  .  . 

1.89 

1.76 

512 

10.4207 

.01978 

.  19568       .  18667 

.0003744 

.  0003518 

2  TO  2.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 

21212          2.16 

0.19 
1.70 
1.46 
1.65 
2.12 
1.92 
1.84 
1.80 
1.50 
1.97 
1.96 
1.66 
1.95 
1.83 
2.05 
1.68 
1.81 
1.95 
2.05 
.64 
1.64 

84 
891 
777 
539 
318 
301 
1,031 
608 
314 
167 
562 
302 
509 
462 
380 
544 
373 
583 
464 
786 
2s7 

1.  7216 
16.4061 
19.  1854 
12.  0399 
6.1026 
7.0596 
21.5399 
11.6655 
6.4302 
2.5160 
12.2210 
9.2120 
9.3093 
10.  9073 
12.  0728 
9.8298 
7.0051 
11.7066 
9.6451 
18.3614 
7.3993 

0.02049 
.  01841 
.02469 
.02183 
.81919 
.02345 
.02089 
.01919 
.02048 
.01507 
.02175 
.03050 
.01829 
.  02361 
.  03177 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.02079 
.02336 
.02578 

0.03718  0.00327 
.  39539  .  27890 
.  45276  .  28010 
.  24942  .  19866 
.  14341  .  12643 
.  16872  .  13554 
.  45435  .  39635 
.27765  .20997 
.  12989  .  09645 
.06240  .04957 
.29575  .23953 
.21187  .15292 
.22529  .18153 
.  25522  .  19960 
.  26680  .  24750 
.  23690  .  16514 
.  15971  .  12680 
.24468  .22828 
.  22184  .  19772 
.42965  .11750 
.  178.33  .  12135 

0.  0004427 
.  0004437 
.0005827 
.  0004627 
.  0004510 
.0005605 
.0004407 
.0004567 
.  0004137 
.0003736 
.0005262 
.0007016 
.  0004426 
.0005524 
.0007021 
.  0004355 
.0004282 
.  0004197 
.  0004781 
.0005466 
.0006213 

0.0000389 
.  0003130 
.0003605 
.0003602 
.0004163 
.0004502 
.0003844 
.0003454 
.  0003072 
.0002969 
.0004263 
.0005063 
.0003566 
.0004321 
.0006513 
.0003036 
.0003399 
.0003916 
.0004262 
.  0001495 
.0004228 

27205          2  41 

27206  2.  36 

27505          2.  12 

33107  2.35 

33605  2.39 

.;  5          2  11 

48106  2.38 

48409          2.08 

55309  1  2.48 
55908  2.  42 

55909  .        2.  30 

56206  2.42 

56207  2.34 

57508         2  21 

65306  2.41 

65307  .  .      2.28 

65308...        2.09 
74806  2.  30 

81707          2.  34 

81708         2  41 

Average..  2.30 

1.68 

489.6 

10.  5874 

.02173 

.24272  .17872 

.0004991 

.0003652 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 

20706  ..        2.78 

2.05 
1.85 
2.00 
.17 
1.97 
.97 
.23 
2.11 
1.96 
2.18 
2.18 
1.97 
1.82 
2.06 
1.82 
2.16 
1.88 
1.90 
1.95 
1.7:5 
.82 
1.98 
2.32 
1.09 

163 
444 
867 
118 
313 
226 
1,232 
377 
1,156 
418 
791 
283 
169 
326 
228 
192 
180 
866 
166 
267 
167 
444 
251 
243 

3.  3138 
9.9070 
17.1115 
2.3066 
6.2514 
4.  1516 
20.9290 
9.  4172 
19.  7446 
8.0214 
14.3111 
2.6965 
3.  2787 
6.4102 
4.2376 
3.9797 
2.9909 
16.4120 
3.3266 
5.5666 
3.0850 
10.  0005 

0.  02033 
.02282 
.  01974 
.01955 
.02004 
.01837 
.01699 
.02498 
.01708 
.01919 
.01809 
.00953 
.01940 
.01966 
.01859 
.02073 
.01667 
.01895 
.02004 
.02085 
.01847 
.02252 
.02287 
.02206 

0.  09212  0.  06793 
.  27443  .  18328 
.  48428  .  34222 
.06804  .00392 
.  16691  .  12315 
.12039  .04027 
.56299  .04704 
.  25709  i  .  19870 
.50744  '  .38700 
.  21898  .  17487 
.377S1  .31198 
.07577  .05312 
.09082  .05967 
.  17692  .  13398 
.11484  .07712 
.11780  .OS506 
.08400  .05640 
.43164  .31182 
.09712  .06487 
.14362  .09630 
.07X05  .02530 
.27003  .19800 
.  14608  .  12835 
.15549  .05844 

0.0005652 
.0006181 
.  0005.586 
.0005766 
.0005353 
.0005327 
.  0004.569 
.0006664 
.0004389 
.0005238 
.0004777 
.0002677 
.  0005374 
.  0005427 
.0005037 
.0006135 
.0004667 
.0004984 
.0005850 
.  000.5379 
.0004674 
.0006082 
.0096037 
.0006399 

0.  0004168 
.0004222 
.0003948 
.0000332 
.0003948 
.0001782 
.0000391 
.  0005271 
.0003348 
.0004183 
.0003944 
.0001S77 
.  0003531 
.0004109 
.0008383 
.  000447S 
.0003134 
.0003600 
.  0003!  K  is 
.  0003607 
.0001515 
.0004459 
.  0005306 
.0002405 

20707          2  77 

20710  2.  83 

21207          2  96 

21305  2.  67 

21306  2.90 
21805         2  69 

21807  2.  73 

21808          2.  57 

0800         2  73 

21905  2.64 

22205          281 

22207          2  77 

26905..  ..      2.76 

26906          2  71 

26908  2.96 

26909..  ..      2.80 

27005          2  63 

27207          2  92 

-•:•"••          2.58 

27307.  .        2.53 

27506.         2  70 

!7fi08          2  64 

27509         2  90 

86 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  19. — Relation  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  to  proteid  nitrogen — Continued. 
2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN— Continued. 


Record  number. 

Percentage 
of- 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 

Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

1.55 
3.50 
2.29 
1.26 
2.10 
1.23 
1.39 
1.73 
1.34 
1.44 
2.06 
2  19 
1.18 
.70 
1.29 

i$? 

.75 
1.58 
1.87 
.65 
2.20 
2.07 
1.96 
1.49 
1.75 
1.47 
1.61 
2.12 
2.09 
2.23 
1.85 
1.95 
2.21 
2.09 
2.13 
1.86 
1.64 
2.34 
1.55 
2.68 
2.11 
2.20 
2.18 
2.65 
2.03 

Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 

87 
132 
309 
461 
193 
139 
401 
158 
293 
447 
67 
170 
124 
340 
124 
478 
473 
547 
944 
578 
397 
866 
504 
500 
503 
331 
499 
749 
336 
644 
872 
333 
563 
950 
88 
135 
762 
596 
180 
359 
270 
1,158 
165 
370 
146 
722 

Ker- 
nels. 

. 

Average 
kernel. 

Proteid 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin- 
plus- 
glutenin 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 

Pmtpii   Gliadin- 

§S  SSEffi 

3£~  Mr 

kernel. 

%  28805... 

2.91 
2.91 
2.96 
2.64 
2.93 
2.84 
2.63 
2.82 
2.74 
2.88 
2.93 
2.82 
2.92 
2.94 
2.90 
2.54 
2.87 
2.70 
2.60 
2.56 
2.54 
2.80 
2.63 
2.64 
2.58 
2.67 
2.81 
2.59 
2.73 
2.57 
2.96 
2.51 
2.61 
2.59 
2.65 
2.75 
2.62 
2.61 
2.80 
2.85 
2.87 
2.74 
2.79 
2.  63 
2.94 
2.71 

2.1851 
2.  5601 
6.  1394 
8.0905 
3.3004 
2.5134 
8.  4605 
3.  0228 
6.  7665 
9.  3541 
1.9218 
4.  1546 
2.8000 
5.9990 
2.  5235 
8.  3935 
12.  0278 
9.8346 
17.  4226 
11.3592 
9.  5078 
17.  8506 
9.  8228 
10.  9180 
11.0930 
5.  7948 
7.9968 
19.  3966 
5.  7431 
12.0161 
14.  4556 
6.  5232 
13.  5720 
15.  8086 
1.5364 
2.  4923 
14.  9992 
12.  2004 
2.  7616 
6.  9861 
4.  8988 
23.  1471 
3.3006 
7.  6690 
2.  8?27 
15.  3928 

0.  02512 
.  01939 
.  01987 
.  01972 
.01710 
.  01808 
.02110 
.01913 
.  02309 
.02093 
.  02869 
.  02444 
.02258 
.  01764 
.  02035 
.01756 
.  02543 
.  01798 
.  01846 
.  01965 
.  02395 
.02062 
.  01949 
.  02184 
.  02205 
.  01751 
.  01603 
.02590 
.01709 
.  01866 
.  01658 
.  01959 
.02356 
.  01664 
.  01746 
.  01846 
.  01968 
.02047 
.  01534 
.  01946 
.01814 
.  01999 
.02001 
.  02073 
.  01940 
.02132 

0.  06359 
.07450 
.  18173 
.  23998 
.  09670 
.  07138 
.  22251 
.08522 
.18540 
.  21399 
.  05631 
.11716 
.  08176 
.  17637 
.  07318 
.21319 
.  34524 
.  26553 
.45299 
.29079 
.  24150 
.43995 
.25834 
.28823 
.28580 
.  15470 
.  22471 
.50238 
.  15679 
.30881 
.42790 
.  16373 
.  34616 
.40945 
;  .  04164 
.  06854 
.39297 
,  .  31842 
.  07733 
.  19905 
.14060 
.  63422 
.09208 
.02017 
.08328 
i  .  41715 

0.  03387 
.  OS960 
.  14060 
.  10194 
.  06931 
.  03091 
.11760 
.05229 
.09067 
.  13470 
.  03959 
.09099 
.  03304 
.  04199 
.  03255 
.  17458 
.  21289 
.  07376 
.  27528 
.21241 
.  06180 
.  39272 
.  20333 
.21400 
.16529 
.10141 
.11755 
.31229 
.  12175 
.25174 
.  32236 
.12068 
.  26465 
.  34937 
.03211 
.  05309 
.  27898 
.20008 
.06462 
.  10828 
.  13126 
.48839 
.  07261 
.  16714 
.07507 
.  31248 

0.  0007309 
.0005644 
.0005881 
.  0005327 
.0005010 
.  0005135 
.  0005549 
.  0005394 
.  0006475 
.0006027 
.  0008404 
.0006892 
.  0006594 
.  0005187 
.0005902 
.  0004460 
.0007299 
.  0004877 
.  0004799 
.0005031 
.  0006225 
.  0005773 
.  0005126 
.  0005765 
.0005690 
.  0004674 
.  0004503 
.0006707 
.  0004667 
.  0004795 
.  0004907 
.  0004917 
.0006149 
.  0004310 
.  0004731 
.0005077 
.  0005157 
.  0005343 
.0004296 
.  0005545 
.  0005207 
.  0005464 
.  0005581 
.0005451 
.  0005704 
.  0005778 

0.  0003894 
.  0006787 
.0004550 
.  0002485 
.  0003591 
.  0002224 
.  0002933 
.0003309 
.  0003094 
.  0003014 
.  0005910 
.  0005352 
.  0002664 
.  0001235 
.  0002625 
.  0003652 
.  0004501 
,0001348 
.0002917 
.0003675 
.  0001557 
.  0004536 
.  0004034 
.  0004281 
.0002609 
.  0003064 
.  0002356 
.0004170 
.  0003622 
.0003900 
.  0003697 
.  0003624 
.  0004594 
.  0003677 
.  0003649 
.  0003932 
.  0003660 
.  0003557 
.  0003590 
.  0003016 
.  0004861 
.0004218 
.  0004402 
.  0004519 
.  0005141 
.  0004328 

33105   

37305 

37705  

37707  
38005 

38606  

38608  
38609 

39405  

39506 

40505  

43405   

44505 

44606  

46107  
48305 

48806  

55008 

55206 

55308  

55506  
55507 

55605  
55606 

55905  :  

55906  
55907 

56105  

56106  
56107 

56205  

56208 

56209 

57007  

57406 

57407  

57408   

57506 

57507  

57805 

58805 

63106  

66005 

81505 

81706  

Average  .  . 

2.74   1.79  419.3 

8.  2271 

.01991 

.  22222 

.14658 

.  000546S 

.  0003557 

3  TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


20709... 

3.05 

2.31 

258 

5.3229 

0.  02063 

0.  16235 

0.  12296 

i 
0  0006292  0  0004766 

20805 

3.32 

2  26 

697 

14  6942 

.  02157 

.  48784 

33208 

0006999    0004875 

21205  
21208  
21307 

3.16 
3.24 
3  04 

.22 
2.15 
.46 

123 

287 
143 

2.  3642 
5.  1594 
2  5691 

.'01922 
.01798 
01796 

.  07471 
.  16712 
.  07810 

.00520 
.11093 
.01182 

.0006074   .0000423 
.0005824   .0003866 
0005461    0000826 

21906  
21907  

3.18 
3.35 

2.10 
2.15 

408 
158 

10.4800 
2.9248 

.02563 
.01851 

.  33402 
.  09798 

.22008 
.06288 

.0008168   .0005382 
i  0006201    0003980 

22206 

3  22 

2  11 

146 

2  5712 

.01720 

.  08086 

05425 

0005538  '   0003629 

22208  

3.18 

2.14 

118 

1.9090 

.01619 

.06071 

.04084 

.0005144  j  .0003465 

22210  
22211 

3.17 
3  17 

1.55 
1  69 

298 
561 

6.  0173 
11  5675 

.02019 
02062 

.  19075 
36671 

.  09327 
19548 

.0006401  1  .0003129 
0006537  '   0003485 

26808  

3.09 

2.28 

222 

3.8811 

.01748 

.11992 

.08849 

.  0005402   .  0003985 

28206 

3.07 

2.42 

219 

4.  3698 

.  01996 

.  13415 

.  10575 

0006126    0004830 

28806 

3  02 

1  86 

685 

14  4630 

02111 

43679 

26901 

0006376    0003926 

33305  

3.41 

2.41 

150 

3.  1346 

.  02030 

.10689 

.  07554 

.  0007126   .  0005037 

33607  
48306 

3.22 
3.29 

2.45 
2  13 

136 
157 

2.8903 
2  6571 

.02125 
01692 

.  09307 
08742 

.  07081 
05660 

.0006843   .0005206 
0005568  i   0003604 

48506 

3  20 

2  17 

556 

9  4585 

01701 

30267 

20525 

0005444    0003691 

SELECTION   TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    ENDOSPERM. 


87 


TABLE  19. — Relation  of  gliadin-plus-glvtenin  nitrogen  to  proteid  nitrogen — Continued. 
3  TO  3.5  I'KK  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN  -Continued. 


Pern 
of 

Record  number.    Pro- 
teid 

nitro- 
gen. 

ntage 

Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

<ilia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

Ker- 
nels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Proteid 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 

Gliadin- 
plus- 
glutenin 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
average 
kernel 

48705                       3.  13 

1.56 
.71 
1.99 
1.7.5 
1.96 
2.92 
2.49 
2.47 

264 
379 
393 
451 
216 
221 
307 
235 

4.3615 
6.1983 
7.9684 
7.  1852 
3.7407 
2.  4731 
4.2207 
2.5436 

0.01652 
.01635 
.02028 
.01593 
.01732 
.01118 
.  01375 
.01082 

0.  13652 
.18596 
.24303 
.22705 
.11636 
.07859 
.13042 
.07656 

0.06S04 
.04401 
.15857 
.12574 
.07332 
.07221 
.  10510 
.06283 

0.0005171 
.0004906 
.0006185 
.0005034 
.0006386 
.000:3556 
.0004248 
.0003258 

0.0002577 
.0001161 
.0004036 
.0002788 
.0003395 
.0003264 
.0003424 
.0002673 

48706                   •     3  00 

5500.5                       3  05 

55006  3.16 
5550B                       3  11 

5790,")  3.  IS 

58207                        3.09 

58705                       3  01 

Average  .  .     3.  16 

1.95 

299.5 

5.  5817 

.01817 

.17602 

.10889 

.0005741 

.0003516 

3.5  TO  4  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17.506 

3.52 

2.23 

93   2.2881 

0.02460 

0  08044  0  05102  0  0008660 

0  0005486 

18905  
_'1M1  
•2MMK  
26107  
38505  

3.81 
3.75 
3.82 
3.92 
3.61 

1,54 
2.16 

1.88 
1.35 

1.  77 

103   1.4864 
567  11.9114 
173   3.5574 
144   2.0390 
563  12.  1088 

.01443 
.02101 
.02056 
.01416 
.02252 

.05663  '  .03315  .0005498 
.  44666   .  25728  .  0007877 
.  13589   .  06688  .  0007855 
.07993   .02753  .000.5551 
.  43713   .  21432  .  0007764 

.  0003218 
.0004538 
.0003955 
.0001912 
0003986 

12205 

3.63 

2.73 

94   1.  8494 

.01967 

.  06713    05049   00071  42 

0005370 

45005 

3  58 

1  36 

235   3  234J 

01376 

11575    04398   0004  W7 

0001871 

4W).-,  
66006 

3.66 
3.54 

1.76 
1.38 

137   1.9154 
366   6.0090 

.01398 
.01642 

.07010   .03371   .0005117 
.  21272    08292   0005812 

.0002460 
0002266 

Average  .  . 

3.68 

,.* 

247.5   4.6399 

.01811 

.  17024   .  OS613  .  0006620 

.0003506 

4  TO  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 




4.26 

2.02 

983 

14.8137 

0.  01507 

l        i 
0.63107  0.29934  0.0006420  0.0003044 

21813  

4.04 

2.14 

216 

4.0258 

.01877 

.16377   .08615  .0007582   .0004017 

21909 

4.43 

i  H 

525 

12.  1819 

.02317 

.53889   .29846  .0010265   .0005677 

34405 

4  33 

2  44 

207 

4  1281 

01994 

.17875    10073   0008635    0004865 

55007  

4.21 

2.21 

118 

2.  1571 

.01828 

.09082   .04767  .0007696   .0004040 

76206 

4.45 

2.03 

447 

5.4411 

.01217 

.24213   .11046  .0005417  '  .0002471 

Average  .  . 

4.29 

2.14 

416 

7.1230 

.01790 

.30757   .15714  .0007669  I  .0004019 

I        | 

MORE  THAN  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


21206  

41  1'  i  1.") 

5.23 
5.03 
4  69 

0.22 
1.34 
3  07 

; 

14'.' 
2-37 
194 

2.8564 
3.  9143 
:;  6302 

0.01917 
.01577 
.01871 

0.14939 
.19689 
17026 

0.00628 
.05245 
.11145 

0010026 
0007934 
0008776 

0.0000422 
.0002113 
.  000.5744 

4*"U»'>  

72rt)7  
92306.. 

4.87 
5.82 
5.59 
4.93 

2.25 
1.94 
2.«1 
4.06 

249 
110 

%! 

3.2964 

2.4420 
3.4442 
6.0091 

.01324 
.02220 
.01832 
.01732 

.16053 
.14213 
.19253 
.29625 

.08168 
.04738 
.08645 
.24397 

0006447 

0012921 
0010241 
0008536 

.0002979 
.0004307 
.0004598 
.  0007032 

Average  .  . 

5.16 

2.198 

2,0.6| 

3.6561 

.01782 

.18685 

.08995 

0009269 

.0003885 

88 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  20. — Summary  of  analyses,  showing  relation  of  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen  to  proteid 

nitrogen. 


Range  of  per- 
centage of 
proteid  nitro- 
gen. 

Num- 
ber of 
analy- 

Percentage 
of— 

Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 

Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

Kernels. 

Proteid 
Average  nitrogen 
kernel,     in  ker- 
nels. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin 
nitrogen 
in 
kernels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in 
average 
kernel. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
average 
kernel. 

Ito2... 
2  to  2  5 

3 

21 
70 
26 
10 
6 
•  7 

1.89 
2.30 
2.74 
3.16 
3.68 
4.29 
5.16 

.76 
.68 
.73 
.95 
.82 
2.22 
2.20 

512.0 
489.6 
419.3 
299.5 
247.5 
416.0 
210.6 

10.  4207 
10.  5874 
8.  2271 
5.5817 
4.6399 
7.  1230 
3.6561 

0.  01978 
.02173 
.01991 
.01817 
.01811 
.01790 
.01782 

0.  19568 
.  24272 
.  22222 
.  17602 
.  17024 
.  30757 
.  18685 

0.  18667 
.  17872 
.  13948 
.  10889 
.08613 
.  15714 
.08995 

0.  0003744 
.0004991 
.0005468 
.  0005741 
.  0006620 
.  0007669 
.0009269 

0.  0003518 
.0003652 
.0003442 
.  0003516 
.0003506 
.  0004019 
.0003886 

2.5to3  

3to3  5  

3  5  to  4 

4to4.5  

4.5  and  over..  .. 

The  figures  in  Table  20  show  that  while  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitro- 
gen increases  with  proteid  nitrogen  it  does  not  do  so  in  the  same  ratio, 
the  increase  in  proteid  nitrogen  being  due  in  large  measure  to  an 
increase  in  other  proteids. 

The  same  analyses  are  tabulated  in  Table  21  according  to  the 
increase  in  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen,  and  the  averages  for  each 
group  are  stated  in  Table  22.  In  the  latter  table  the  increase  in 
proteid  nitrogen  does  not  keep  pace  with  the  increase  in  gliadin-plus- 
glutenin  nitrogen,  there  being  1.74  per  cent  other  proteid  nitrogen  in 
the  first  group  and  1.25  per  cent  in  the  last. 

It  thus  becomes  evident  that  a  determination  of  proteid  nitrogen  in 
the  kernel  is  not  an  accurate  guide  to  the  content  of  gliadin  plus 
glutenin,  and  that  a  direct  determination  of  these  substances  is 
necessary. 

It  is,  furthermore,  apparent  that  a  determination  of  gliadin-plus- 
glutenin  nitrogen  will  permit  of  the  selection  of  kernels  having  a 
large  percentage  of  these  substances. 

TABLE  21. — Relation  of  proteid  nitrogen  to  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN    NITROGEN,  1  TO  1.5  PER  CENT.          « 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Percentage  of— 

Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Gliadin- 
plus- 
glute- 
nin  ni- 
trogen. 

Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Gliadin 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 
riin  nitro- 
gen in  aver- 
age kernel. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

21210 

1.34 
1.35 
1.46 
1.09 
1.26 
1.23 
1.39 
1.34 
1.44 
1.18 
1.29 
1.36 
1.49 
1.47 
1.38 

5.03 
3.92 
2.36 
2.90 
2.64 
2.84 
2.63 
2.74 
2.88 
2.92 
2.90 
3.58 
2.58 
2.81 
3.54 

237 
144 
777 
243 
461 
139 
401 
293 
447 
124 
124 
235 
505 
499 
366 

3.9143 
2.0390 
19.1854 
5.3615 
8.0905 
2.5134 
8.  4605 
6.  7665 
9.3541 
2.8000 
2.5235 
3.2340 
11.0930 
7.9968 
6.0090 

0.01575 
.01416 
.02469 
.02206 
.01972 
.01808 
.02110 
.02309 
.02093 
.02258 
.02035 
.01376 
.02205 
.01603 
.  01642 

0.05245 
.02753 
.28010 
.05844 
.  10194 
.03091 
.11760 
.09067 
.  13470 
.03304 
.03255 
.04398 
.16529 
.11755 
.08292 

0.  19689 
.07993 
.45276 
.15549 
.23998 
.  07138 
.  22251 
.18540 
.21399 
.08176 
.07318 
.11575 
.28580 
.  22471 
.21272 

0.0002113 
.0001912 
.0003605 
.0002405 
.0002485 
.0002224 
.  0002933 
.0003094 
.0003014' 
.  0002664 
.0002625 
.0001871 
.0002609 
.0002356 
.0002266 

0.0007934 
.  0005551 
.0005827 
.0006399 
.0005327 
.0005135 
.0005549 
.0006479 
.0006027 
.0006594 
.0005902 
.0004927 
.0005690 
.0004503 
.0005812 

26107 

27206  

27509 

37705 

38005     

38606 

38609  

39405  

43405 

44606  

4.5005  

55606 

55906 

66006  

Average  

1.34 

3.08 

333 

6.  6228 

.01939 

.09198 

.  18748 

.0002545 

.0005843 

SELECTION    TO    INCREASE    PROTEIDS    IN    ENDOSPERM. 


89 


TABLE  21. — Relation  of  proteid  nitrogen  to  rjliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen — Continued. 
GLIADIN-IM.rs-.IUTKNIN  NITROGEN,  1.5  TO  2  PER  CENT. 


Parentage  "f 

Num- 
ber ol 
ker- 
nels. 

Weight  (in  grams)  of— 

Record  mm,-  <•'>',<;!- 
ler-     glute- 
nin  ni- 
trogen. 

Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 

ifornou  Average 
Kernels.  kemef 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin  ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin  nitro- 
gen in  aver- 
age kernel. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

18905           1.54 

3.81 
2.77 
2.67 
2.57 
3.82 
4.43 
2.81 
2.77 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.80 
2.63 
2.41 
2.92 
2.58 
2.12 
2.70 
2.91 
3.02 
2.39 
3.61 
2.82 
2.11 
2.38 
2.87 
2.02 
3.66 
3.13 
3.05 
3.16 
2.60 
2.57 
2.48 
1.89 
3.11 
2.64 
2.67 
2.59 
2.42 
2.30 
2.51 
2.42 
2.34 
2.61 
2.62 
2.61 
2.85 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
5.82 
1.81 
1.98 
2.41 

103 
444 
312 
1,156 
173 
525 
283 
169 
298 
561 
228 
180 
866 
891 
166 
267 
539 
444 
87 
685 
301 
563 
158 
1,031 
608 
473 
314 
137 
264 
393 
451 
944 
578 
167 
342 
216 
500 
331 
749 
562 
302 
333 
509 
462 
563 
762 
596 
359 
544 
373 
583 
110 
729 
465 
287 

1.4864 
9.9070 
6.2514 
19.7446 
3.5574 
12.  1819 
2.6965 
3.2787 
6.0173 
11.5675 
4.2376 
2.9999 
16.4120 
16.4061 
3.3266 
5.5666 
12.0399 
10.0005 
2.1851 
14.4630 
7.0596 
12.1088 
3.0228 
21.5399 
11.6655 
12.0278 
6.4302 
1.9154 
4.3615 
7.9684 
7.1852 
17.4226 
11.3592 
2.5160 
5.6864 
3.7407 
10.9180 
5.7948 
19.3966 
12.2210 
9.2120 
6.5232 
9.3093 
10.9073 
13.5720 
14.9992 
12.2004 
6.9861 
9.8298 
7.0051 
11.7066 
2.4420 
15.7835 
9.7922 
7.3993 

0.01443 
.02282 
.02004 
.01708 
.02056 
.02317 
.00953 
.01940 
.02019 
.02062 
.01859 
.01667 
.01895 
.01841 
.02004 
.02085 
.02183 
.02252 
.02572 
.02111 
.02345 
.02252 
.01913 
.02089 
.01919 
.02543 
.02048 
.01398 
.01652 
.02028 
.01593 
.01846 
.01965 
.01507 
.01663 
.01732 
.02184 
.01751 
.02590 
.02175 
.03050 
.01959 
.01829 
.03361 
.02356 
-.01968 
.02047 
.01946 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.02220 
.02165 
.02106 
.02578 

0.03315 
.18328 
.12315 
.38700 
.06688 
.29846 
.05312 
.05967 
.09327 
.19548 
.07712 
.05640 
.31182 
.27890 
.06487 
.09630 
.19866 
.19800 
.03887 
.26901 
.13554 
.21432 
.05229 
.39635 
.20997 
.21289 
.09645 
.03371 
.06804 
.15857 
.12574 
.27528 
.21241 
.04957 
.08871 
.07332 
.21400 
.  10141 
.31229 
.23953 
.15292 
.12068 
.18153 
.19960 
.26465 
.27898 
.20008 
.10828 
.16514 
.12680 
.22828 
.04738 
.27937 
.  19193 
.12135 

0.05663 
.27443 
.16691 
.50744 
.13589 
.53888 
.07577 
.09082 
.19075 
.36671 
.11484 
.08400 
.43164 
.39539 
.09712 
.14362 
.24942 
.27003 
.06359 
.43679 
.  16872 
.43713 
.08522 
.45435 
.27765 
.34524 
.12989 
.07010 
.13652 
.24303 
.22705 
.45299 
.29079 
.06240 
.  10747 
.11636 
.28823 
.15470 
.50238 
.29575 
.21187 
.16373 
.22529 
.25522 
.34616 
.39297 
.31842 
.19905 
.23690 
.  15971 
.24468 
.  14213 
.28569 
.19388 
.17833 

0.0003218 
.0004222 
.0003948 
.0003348 
.0003955 
.0005677 
.0001877 
.0003531 
.0003129 
.0003485 
.0003383 
.0003134 
.0003600 
'   .0003130 
.0003908 
.0003607 
.0003602 
.0004459 
.0003894 
.0003926 
.0001502 
.,*„,,,.-, 

.0003309 
.0003844 
.0003454 
.0004501 
.0003072 
.0002460 
.0002577 
.0004036 
.0002788 
.0002917 
.0003675 
.0002969 
.0002599 
.0003395 
.0004281 
.0003064 
.0004170 
.0004263 
.0005063 
.0003624 
.0003566 
.0004321 
.0004594 
.0003660 
.0003357 
.0003016 
.0003036 
.0003399 
.0003916 
.0004307 
.0003832 
.0004128 
.0004228 

0.0005498 
.0006181 
.0005350 
.0004389 
.0007855 
.0010265 
.0002677 
.0005376 
.0006401 
.0006537 
.0005037 
.0004667 
.0004984 
.0004437 
.0005850 
.0005379 
.0004627 
.0006082 
.0007309 
.0006376 
.0005605 
.0007764 
.0005394 
.0004407 
.0004567 
.0007299 
.0004137 
.0005117 
.0005171 
.0006185 
.0005034 
.0004799 
.0005031 
.0003736 
.0003142 
.0005386 
.0005765 
.0004674 
.0006707 
.0005262 
.0007016 
.0004917 
.0004426 
.0005524 
.0006149 
.0005157 
.0005343 
.0005545 
.0004355 
.0004282 
.0004197 
.0002921 
.0003919 
.0004170 
.0806213 

20707  1.85 

21305       .  .    .97 

21808            .96 

21908  .88 

21909       .  .i    .98 

22205            .97 

22207  82 

22210            .  55 

22211  69 

26906  '    .82 

26909         I    .88 

27005  !    .90 

27205.           .70 

27207            95 

27305.  73 

27505         !    .65 

27506  |    .98 

28805  55 

28806            .86 

33605  92 

38505        .    .77 

38  "-            .73 

39205  i    .84 

48106            .  80 

48305  77 

48409  50 

48505            .76 

48705  56 

55005            .99 

55006  !    .75 

55008  1    .58 
55206            .87 

55305  .97 

55307         i    .  56 

55508...          .96 

55605  !    .96 

55905            .75 

55907...          .61 

55908  % 

55909            .66 

56205  85 

56206  1    .95 

56207            .83 

56808  ;   .95 

57407     .   .    .86 

57408            .64 

57507,  .55 

65306            .68 

65307  81 

Q6308  95 

69805            .94 

80305  76 

81705.           .96 

81708           1.64 

Average...   1.80   2.76 

442.5 

9.0243 

.0201ft 

.16392 

.23801 

.0003653 

.0005538 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2  TO  25  PER  CENT. 


17508... 

2.23 

3.52 

93 

2  2881 

0.02460 

0.05102 

1 
0.08044   0.0005486  0.  00086^0 

20706... 

2  05 

2  78 

163 

3  3138 

02033 

06793 

.09212    .0004168   .0005652 

20709 

2  31 

3  05 

258 

5  3229 

02063 

12296 

16235    .0004766   .00062P2 

20710 

2  00 

2  83 

M.; 

17  1115 

01974 

34222 

48428     0003948   .  00055J-6 

20805... 

•  0 

3  32 

697 

14  6942 

02157 

33308 

.  48784    .  0004X75   .  0006999 

21208. 

2  15 

3  24 

287 

5  1594 

01798 

11093 

Iti7  12    .0003866   .0005*24 

21807 

2  11 

2  73 

377 

9  4172 

02498 

19870 

25709    0005271   .0006664 

21809 

2  18 

9  7:} 

418 

8  0214 

01919 

17487 

21898    0004183   .0005238 

L'lMl  
21812 

2.16 
2  02 

3.75 
4  26 

567 
083 

11.9114 
14  8139 

.02101 
01507 

.25728 
29934 

.44666  |  ".0004538   .0007877 
63107    .  0003044   .  0006420 

21813 

'  2  14 

4  04 

216 

4  0258 

01877 

08615 

16377     0004017   .0007582 

21905.  .  . 

2.18 

1  -.; 

791 

14.3111 

.01809 

.31198 

.37781    .0003944   .0004777 

90 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  21. — Relation  of  proteid  nitrogen  to  gliadin-plus-glutenin  nitrogen — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2  TO  2.5  PER  CENT— Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 


21906 

21907 

22206 

22208. . . 


26905. 


27508 

28206 

33107 

33305 

33607 

34405... 

37305 

37707 

39506 

40505 

46107 

48306 

48406 

48506 

55007 

55506 

55507 

56105 

56106; 

56107 

56209 

57007 

57406.. 

57506 

5750S 

58207 

58705 

58805 

63106 

66005 

74606 

76206 

81706... 


Percentage  of — j 


Gliadin- 
plus-    jProteid 
glute-     nitro- 

nin  ni- 

trogen. 


Average . 


2.10 
2.15 
2.11 
2.14 
2.28 
2.09 
2.16 
2.32 
2.42 
2.12 
2.41 
2.45 
2.44 
2.29 
2.10 
2.06 
2.19 

2.08  I 
2. 13 
2.25  ! 
2.17 
2.21  I 
2.20  j 
2.07 

2  12 

2. 09  ' 
2.23 
2.21 
2.09 
2. 13 
2.34 
2.05 
2.49 
2.47'{ 
2.11  I 
2.20 
2.18 
2.05 
2.05 
2.03 


gen. 


2.18 


3.18 

3.35 

3.22 

3.10 

3.09 

2.76 

2.96 

2.64 

3.07 

2.35 

3.41 

3.22 

4.33 

2.96  ! 

2.93 

2.93  i 

->  82  ! 

2.54  i 

3.29 

4.87 

3. 20 

4.21  i 
2.80  i 
2.63 
2.73 
2.57  i 
2.96 
2.59 
2.65 
2.  ;:> 
2.80 
2.21 
3.09 
3.01 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.30 
4.45 
2.71 


408 
158 
146 
118 
222 
326 
192 
251 
219 
318 
150 
136 
207 
309 
193 
67 
170 
478 
157 
249 
556 
118 
866 
504 
336 
644 
872 
950 
168 
135 
180 
380 
307 
235 
1,158 
165 
370 
464 
447 
722 


Weight  (in  grams)  of — 


Kernels. 


;  Gliadin- 

Plus-glu~ 
tenin  ni- 
trogen  in 
kernels. 


Proteid 


_ 

nels' 


Gliadin-    |  Proteid 

plus-glute-  :  nitrogen 

nin  nitro-  i  in  aver- 

gen  in  aver-;  age  ker- 

|  age  kernel.        nel. 


10.  4800 
2.9248 
2.  5712 
1.9090 
3.8811 
6.  4102 
3. 9797 
5. 5324 
4. 3698 
6. 1026  ! 
3.1346 
2.8902  | 
4.1281  i 
6.1394 
3.3004  , 
1.9218  ; 
4.1^46 
8.3935 
2.6571 
3.2964  ! 
9.4585  i 
2.1571 

17. 8506 
9.8228 
5.  7431 

12. 0161 

14.  4556 

15.  8086 

1.  5364 

2.  4923 
2.  7616 

12.  0728 
4.2207 
2.  5436 

23. 1471 
3.3006 
7.6690 
9.  6451 
5.4411 

15. 3928 


0. 02563 
.01851 
.01720 
.01619 
. 01748 
. 01966 
.02073 
.02287 
. 01996 
.01919 
.02090 
. 02125 
. 01994 
. 01987 
.01710 
. 02869 
. 02444 
.01756 
. 01692 
.01324 
.01701 
.01828 
. 02062 
.  01949 
.01709 
.01866 
. 01658 
.01664 
. 01746 
. 01846 
. 01534 
.03177 
.01375  i 
.01082 
. 01999 
.02001 
.02073 
.02079 
.01217 
. 02132 


0.22008 
.06288 
. 05425 
. 04084 
.08849 


.08596 
.12835 
.10575 
. 12643 
.07554 
. 07081 
.10073 
.14060 
.06931 
. 03959 
.09099 
.  17458 
.05660 
. 08168 
. 20525 
.04767 
. 39272 
. 20333 
. 03503 
. 05768 
. 10553 
. 34937 
.03211 
.  05309 
.06462 
.24750 
. 10510 
.06283 


0.33403 
.09798 
.08086 
.06071  ! 
.11992  i 
. 17692  I 
.11780 
.14608  ! 
.13415 
. 14341 
.10689 
.09307 
. 17875 
.  18173 
. 09670 
.  05631 
.11716 
.  21319 
.08742  j 
.16053 
. 30267 
.09082 
. 49995 
.25834 
. 15679 


. 07261 
. 16714 
. 19772 
. 11046 
. 31248 


. 42792 
.40945 
.04164 
.06854 
. 07733 
.26680 
. 13042 
. 07656 
.  63422 
.09208 
.20170 
.22184 
.  24213 
.  41715 


0.0005382 
.  0003980 
.0003629 
.  0003465 
. 0003985 
. 0004109 
. 0004478 
. 0005306 
.0004830 
. 0004163 
. 0005037 
.0005206 
. 0004865 
. 0004550 
. 0003591 
. 0005910 
. 0005352 
.0003652 
.0003604 
. 0002979 
.0003691 
. 0004040 
. 0004536 
.0004034 
. 0001042 


3. 08  1  380. 1 


7. 2520  .   .  01935    . 14641 


. 21535 


.0001210 
. 0003677 
.0003649 
. 0003932 
.  0003590 
.0006513 
. 0003424 
. 0002673 
. 0004218 
. 0004402 
.0004519 
. 0004262 
. 0002471 
. 0004328 


,0004063 


GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT. 


42205  

2.73 

3.63 

94 

1.  8494 

0.  01967 

0.050049  i  0.06713 

0.  0005370 

0.0007142 

57805  

2.68 

2.87 

270 

4.8988 

.01814 

.13126  !   .14060 

.  0004861 

.  0005207 

57905 

2  92 

3  18 

221 

2  4731 

01118 

07221  i    07859 

000  "%4 

000'-556 

72607  

2.51 

5.59 

188 

3.  4442 

.  01832 

.  OS645     .  19253 

0004598 

.00i0241 

81505... 

2.65 

2  94 

146 

2  8327 

01940 

7507      08328 

0005141 

0005704 

Average  .  .  . 

2.  698 

3.64 

183.  8 

3.0696 

.01734 

.08310     .11243 

.  0004647 

.  0006370 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  3  PER  CENT  AND, OVER. 


40205... 

3.07 

4.69 

194 

3.  6302 

0  01871 

0  11145 

0  17026  !  0  0005744 

0  0008776 

92306.      .  . 

4.06 

4  93 

347 

6  0091 

01732 

24397 

29625     0007032 

0008539 

Average  .  .  . 

3.56 

4.81 

270.5 

4.  8196 

.01801 

.  17771 

.23325  i   .0006388 

.  0008657 

IMPROVKMKNT     IX    QI'AUTY     <>F    (U.T'TKX. 


91 


TABLE   22. — Summary  of  anal,  >g   relation    <.f  protcid  nitrogen   to  gliadhi  - 

glutenin  nitrogen. 


Percentage      Number 

of                         Of— 

Weight  (in  grams)  of- 

Range  of       QM 
percentage  of    jj 

gltitfiiin  ni-     V,]l',S~ 

nitro- 
gen. 

Pro-     Vn 

nitro-  al-v" 

Lvn.     • 

Ker- 
nels. 

Kernels. 

Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
Average    tenin  ni- 
kernel        trogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 
I 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Cliadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin  nitro- 
gen in 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

1  to  !..'>     .       .1.34 

'2.  7ii        .V. 
3.08 

4.  M 

333 
442.5 
380.1 
183.8 
270.5 

6.6228 
9.  0243 
7.  2.V20 
3.06% 
4.8196 

0.  01939       0.  09198 
.  02016         .  16392 
.01935         .14641 
.01734         .08310 
.01801         .17771 

0.  18748 
.23801 
.21535 

.11243 
233^5 

M.  (1002545 
.0003663 

.0004063 
.0004647 

.0006388 

0.000.5843 
.0005538 

.0005872 
.0006370 
.0008657 

1.80 

•>   is 

2.5  to  3  2.70 

3  and  over  3.  56 

IMPROVEMENT  IN  THE  QUALITY  OF  THE  GLUTEN. 

It  is  well  known  that  large  differences  exist  in  the  bread-making 
values  of  different  varieties  of  wheats  even  when  they  have  approxi- 
mately the  same  gluten  content  and  are  raised  in  the  same  locality. 
This  fact  is  generally  attributed  to  differences  in  the  quality  of  the 
gluten. 

W.  Farrar"  points  out  the  difference  in  the  bread-making  qualities 
<>{  two  wheats  due  to  the  quality  of  the  gluten.  He  compares  Saxon 
File  wheat,  which  had  a  gluten  content  of  9.92  per  cent,  and  which 
produced  309  pounds  of  bread  from  200  pounds  of  flour,  with  Purple 
Straw  Tuscan  wheat,  which  had  a  gluten  content  of  9.94  per  cent,  and 
which  produced  only  278  pounds  of  bread  from  the  same  quantity  of 
flour. 

In  this  case  it  was  not  the  amount  but  the  quality  of  the  gluten  that 
determined  the  greater  excellence  of  the  Saxon  Fife  wheat. 

It  has  further  been  stated  by  Girard,6  Snyder/'  and  Guthrie -'  that 
the  ratio  in  which  gliadin  and  glutenin  exist  in  the  gluten  determines 
its  value  for  bread  making. 

It  was  considered  desirable  to  ascertain  whether  the  proportions 
of  these  two  constituents  remain  about  the  same  in  wheats  of  high 
and  of  low  content.  If  the  quality  of  the  gluten  remains  constant  as 
the  quantity  increases,  the  value  of  the  wheat  for  bread  making  will 
improve  in  about  the  same  ratio.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  a 
tendency  for  the  quality  to  deteriorate  as  the  quantity  increases, 
there  would  be  greater  difficulty  in  effecting  improvement. 

In  Table  23,  analyses  of  the  crop  of  1903  are  arranged  in  groups 
according  to  their  content  of  gliadin  plus  glutenin.  The  first  group 
comprises  all  plants  having  less  than  1  per  cent,  and  each  succeeding 
group  increases  by  0.25  per  cent.  It  is  followed  by  Table  24,  which 
is  a  summary  of  Table  23. 

"Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  9  (1898),  pp.  241-250. 

&Compt.  Rend.,  1897,  p.  876. 

''Minnesota  Experiment  Station  Bulletin-  .">4  and  63. 

rf  Agricultural  Gazette  of  New  South  Wales,  9  (1898'),  pp.  363-. "7  1 


92 


IMPEOVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  23. — Ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  content  of  their  sum  increases. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  BELOW  1  PER  CENT. 


Percentage  of— 

Proportion  of— 

Percentage  of— 

Record  number.     G^~     GUadin 

glutenin    nitrogen, 
nitrogen. 

Glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Gliadin. 

Glutenin. 

Proteid 
nitrogen. 

Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

21205...                       0.216 
21206                       '<        .218 

0.114 
.142 
.099 
.109 
.505 
.255 
.126 
.806  ' 
.018 
.629 
.237 

0.  102 
.076 
.071 
.083 
.470 
.206 
.104 
.015 
.730 
.026 
.399 

0.528 
.651 
.582 
.567 
.518 
.447 
.548 
.982 
.024 
.960 
.372 

0.472 
.349 
.418 
.433 
.482 
.553 
.452 
.018 
.976 
.040 
.628 

3.16 
5.23 
2.96 
2.16 
2.90 
3.04 
2.69 
2.53 
2.70 
2.54 
2.34 

2.944 
5.012 
2.790 
1.968 
1.925 
2.579 
2.460 
1.709 
1.952 
1.885 
1.704 

21207  .170 

21212                               .  192 

21306  975 

21307                               .  461 

21805  230 

27307                               .  821 

48806  748 

55308     655 

81707                               .  636 

Average  ..         .484 

.276 

.208 

.562 

.438 

2.93 

2.448 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  1  TO  1.25  PER  CENT. 


27509... 
38005 

1.087 
1.227 

1.072 
.593 

0.015 
.634 

0.986 
.483 

0.014 
.517 

2.90 

2.84 

1.813 
1.613 

43405  

1.184 

1.078 

.106 

.910 

.090 

2.92 

1.736 

Average  .  . 

1.166 

.914 

.252 

.793 

.207 

2.89 

1.721 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  1.25  TO  1.50  PER  CENT. 


26107... 

1.352 

0.108 

1.244 

0.080 

0.920 

3.92 

2.568 

27206 

1.465 

.815 

.650 

.556 

.    .444 

2.36 

.895 

37705 

1.265 

.715 

.550 

.565 

.435 

2.64 

1.375 

38606     

1.387 

.725 

.662 

.522 

.478 

2.63 

1.243 

38609 

1.336 

.586 

.750 

.439 

.561 

2.74 

1.404 

39405  

1.439 

.818 

.621 

.568 

.432 

2.88 

1.441 

44606 

1.287 

1.057 

.230 

.821 

.179 

2.90 

1.613   • 

45005  

1.361 

1.240 

.121 

.911 

.089 

3.58 

2.219 

55606 

1.493 

.899 

.594 

.602 

.398 

2.58 

1.087 

55906  

1.470 

.443 

1.027 

.301 

.699 

2.81 

1.340 

Average  .  . 

1.385 

.741 

.645 

.536 

.463 

2.90 

1.518 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  1.50  TO  1.75  PER  CENT. 


18905  .. 

.537 

0.143 

1.394 

0.093 

0.907 

3.81 

2.273 

22210 

.555 

.801 

.754 

.515 

.485 

3.17 

1.615 

22211  

.692 

1.002 

.690 

.592 

.408 

3.17 

1.478 

27205 

.700 

1.073 

.627 

.631 

.369 

2.41 

.710 

27305  

.735 

1.075 

.660 

.619 

.381 

2.58 

.845 

27505 

.651 

1.032 

.619 

.625 

.375 

2.12 

.469 

28805  

.555 

.958 

.597 

.616 

.384 

2.91 

1.355 

38608 

.731 

.962 

.769 

.556 

.444 

2.82 

1.089 

48409  

.504 

.690 

.814 

.459 

.541 

2.02 

.516 

48705.. 

.563 

.057 

1.506 

.036 

.964 

3.13 

1.567 

55008 

.581 

.687 

.894 

.435 

.565 

2.60 

1.019 

55307  

.561 

.908 

.653 

.582 

.418 

1.89 

.329 

55907 

.608 

.632 

.976 

.393 

.607 

2.59 

.982 

55909  

.658 

.810 

.848 

.488 

.512 

2.30 

.642 

57408 

.639 

1.177 

.462 

.717 

.283 

2.61 

.971 

57507  

.546 

1.141 

.405 

.738 

.262 

2.85 

1.304 

65306 

.683 

.965 

.718 

.573 

.427 

2.41 

.727 

81708  

.641 

1.221 

.420 

.744 

.256 

2.41 

.769 

Average  .  . 

1.619 

.852 

.   .767 

.523 

.477 

2.65 

1.037 

IMI'KoYKMK.VT    IX    QUALITY    OF    GLUTEN. 


TABLE  23. — Ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  content  of  their  sum  increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  1.75  TO  2  PER  CENT. 


I            Pe 

Record  number.  ,  G^^' 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 

rcentage  of— 

Proportion  of  — 

Percentage  of— 

Gliadin 
nitrogen. 

Glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Gliadin. 

Glutenin. 

Proteid 
nitrogen. 

Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

20707                             1.855 

1.646 
1.125 
1.049 
1.046 
1.015 
1.367 
1.185 
.988 
.996 
1.066 
1.278 
1.147 
.902 
1.124 
.862 
1.117 
1.035 
.9% 
.965 
1.102 
1.099 
.840 
1.042 
1.037 
1.044 
.575 
1.075 
.883 
1.089 
.987 
1.127 
.935 
1.052 
1.090 
1.142 
1.159 
1.048 

0.809 
.871 
.920 
.917 
.861 
.609 
.784 
.831 
.883 
.838 
.668 
.830 
.962 
.795 
.904 
.728 
.770 
.770 
.792 
.885 
.655 
1.026 
.932 
.922 
.915 
1.175 
.882 
.967 
.860 
.840 
.819 
.923 
.763 
.856 
.795 
.611 
.908 

0.564 
..564 
.533 
.533 
.541 
.697 
.602 
.543 
.531 
.559 
.652 
.580 
.484 
.585 
.488 
.605 
.573 
.564 
.549 
.555 
.626 
.450 
.528 
.529 
.533 
.328 
.549 
.477 
.559 
.540 
.579 
.503 
.579 
.560 
.589 
.661 
.535 

0.436 
.436 
.467 
.  467 
.  4.  VI 
.303 
.398 
.457 
.469 
.441 
.348 
.420 
.516 
.415 
.512 
.395 
.427 
.436 
.451 
.445 
.374 
.550 
.472 
.471 
.467 
.672 
.451 
.523 
.441 
.460 
.421 
.497 
.421 
.440 
.411 
.339 
.465 

2.77 
2.83 
2.67 
2.57 
3.82 
4.43 
2.81 
2.71 
2.80 
2.63 
2.92 
2.70 
3.02 
2.39 
3.61 
2.11 
2.38 
2.87 
3.66 
3.05 
3.16 
2.56 
2.48 
3.11 
2.64 
2.67 
2.42 
2.51 
2.42 
2.34 
2.61 
2.62 
2.28 
2.09 
5.82 
1.81 
1.98 

0.915 
.834 
.701 
.607 
1.944 
2.454 
.841 
.891 
.921 
.726 
.974 
.723 
1.156 
.471 
1.844 
.265 
.575 
1.104 
1.903 
1.063 
1.406 
.694 
.506 
1.151 
.681 
.920 
.463 
.660 
.471 
.513 
.664 
.762 
.465 
.144 
3.883 
.040 
.024 

20710  1.996 

21305  .969 

21808                              .963 

21908  s7«; 

21909  976 
22205                               .969 

26906  M'.i 
26909                                 <>7'.i 

27005  904 

27207                               .946 

27506  977 

28806      864 

33605                               .919 

38505  766 

39205                                 845 

48106  805 

48305                               .766 

48505  757 

55005  987 
55006                                 .  754 

55206  866 

55305                               .974 

55508  959 

55605                               .959 

55905  750 

55908                     .          .957 

56205                               .850 

56206  949 

56207                               .  827 

56208  946 

57407                               .  858 

65307  815 

65308                               .946 

69805                                937 

80305  .   .                        .770 

81705                               .956 

Average..       1.889           1.044 

.845 

.552 

.448 

2.82 

.929 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN.  2  TO  2.25  PER  CENT. 


1 

17506  2.226 

.458 

0.768 

0.655 

0.345 

3.52 

1.294 

20706  .                          2.053 

.089 

.964 

.530 

.470 

2.78 

.727 

21208                             2  146 

154 

992 

537 

.463 

3.24 

1.094 

21807  2.110 
21809  2.178 
21811  2.156 
21812  2.023 
•J1M3  2.141 
21905  2.  181 
21906                             2.0% 

.174 
.183 
.144 
.139 
.045 
.344 
.208 

.936 
.995 
1.012 
.884 
1.096 
,.837 
.888 

.556 

.  .',43 
.531 
.563 
.488 
.616 

.444 
.  457 
.469 
.437 
.512 
.384 
.424 

2.73 
2.73 
3.75 
4.26 
4.04 
2.64 
3.18 

.620 
.552 
1.594 
2.237 
1.899 
.459 
1.084 

21907  2.146 

.187 

.959 

.447 

3.35 

1.204 

22206  .                          2.113 

.271 

.842 

.601 

VI  H  | 

3.22 

1.107 

3206                            2  142 

309 

.833 

.611 

.389 

3.18 

1.038 

26905  2.087 
26908                             2.158 

.197 
.250 

.890 
.908 

.  573 

.  :,:•.• 

.427 

.4'Jl 

2.76 
2.96 

.673 
.802 

33107                             2.  123 

.283 

.840 

.604 

2.35 

37707  2.097 

.044 

1.053 

.502 

2.93 

.833 

39506                             2.065 

.281 

.784 

.620 

.  HO 

2.93 

.865 

40505  2.189 

.143 

1.046 

.522 

.478 

2.82 

.631 

46107  2.076 

.164 

.912 

.Ml 

2.54 

.464 

48306                             2.  135 

.130 

1.005 

.529 

.471 

3.29 

1.166 

18408  - 
48506  .'.171 
55007  2.211 
2.  197 
2.070 
.56105  2.118 
56106  2.091 
56107  2.234 
56209  2.208 

.290 
.104 
.248 
.136 
.079 
..'77 
.091 
.033 
.161 

.959 
1.067 
.963 
1.061 
.991 
.841 
1.000 
1.201 
L047 

.508 
.564 
.617 
.621 
.603 

.426 
.492 

.  183 
.479 
.397 
.478 
.538 
.474 

4.87 
3.20 
4.21 
2.80 
2.63 
2.73 
2.57 
2.96 
2.59 

2.621 

1.029 

':8 

.560 
.612 
.479 
.72f 
.382 

• 

IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  23. — Ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  content  of  their  sum  increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2  TO  2.25  PER  CENT— Continued 


Record  number. 

Percentage  of— 

Proportion  of— 

Percentage  of— 

Gliadin- 
plus- 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Gliadin 
nitrogen. 

Glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Gliadin. 

Glutenin. 

Proteid 
nitrogen. 

Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

57007 

2.093 
2.134 
2.053 
2.112 
2.199 
2.181 
2.046 
2.029 
2.034 

.159 
.080 
.124 
.060 
.186 
.142 
.016 
.223 
1.701 

0.934 
1.054 
.929 
1.052 
1.013 
1.039 
1.030 
.806 
.333 

0.553 
.506 
.547 
.501 
.539 
.528 
.496 
.602 
.816 

0.447 
.494 
.453 
.499 
.461 
.472 
.504 
.398 
.184 

2.65 
2.75 
2.21- 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
,       2.30 
4.45 
2.71 

0.557 
.616 
.157 
.628 
.591 
.449 
.254 
2.421 
.676 

57406  

57508 

58805  

63106  

66005 

74606  

76206 

81706  

Average  .  . 

2.130 

1.187 

.943 

.557 

.443 

3.05 

.921 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2.25  TO  2.50  PER  CENT. 


20709  . 

2.313 

.307 

1.006 

0.565 

0.435 

3.05 

0.737 

20805 

2.259 

.215 

1.044 

.538 

.462 

3.32 

1  061 

26808  

27508 

2.281 
2.324 

.377 
.247 

.904 
1.077 

.604 
.537 

.396 
.463 

3.09 
2.64 

.809 
.316 

28206  

2.424 

.366 

.058 

.563 

.437 

3.07 

.646 

33305 

2.407 

.182 

.225 

.491 

.509 

3.41 

1.003 

33607  

2.446 

.391 

.055 

.569 

.431 

3.22 

.774 

34405  . 

2.443 

1.230 

.213 

.503 

.497 

4.33 

1.887 

37305 

2.293 

1.208 

.085 

.527 

.473 

2.96 

.667 

57-506  

58207 

2.344 
2.492 

1.203 
1.313 

.141 
.179 

.511 
.526 

.489 
.474 

2.80 
3.09 

.456 
.598 

58705  

2.467 

1.195 

.272 

.484 

.516 

3.01 

.543 

Average  .  . 

2.374 

1.268 

1.105 

.535 

.465 

3.16 

.791 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN  NITROGEN,  2.50  PER  CENT  AND  OVER. 


40205 

3.  059 

.850 

1.219 

0.603 

0.397 

4.69 

1.621 

42205  

2.728 

.480 

1.248 

.542 

.458 

3.63 

.902 

57805 

2.684 

.303 

1.381 

.485 

.515 

2.87 

.186 

57905  

2.918 

.573 

1.345 

.539 

.461 

3.18 

.  2o2 

72607 

2.  515 

.459 

1.056 

.579 

.421 

5.59 

3.  075 

81505 

2.652 

066 

1  586 

.401 

.599 

2  94 

288 

92306  

4.063 

2.388 

1.675 

.587 

.413 

4.93 

.867 

Average  .  . 

2.947 

1.588 

1.358 

.534 

.466 

3.98 

1.029 

TABLE  24. — Summary  of  analyses,  showing  the  ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  as  the  content  of 

their  sum  increases. 


Range  of  percentage 
of  gliadin-plus- 
glutenin  nitrogen. 

Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus- 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Percentage  of  — 

Proportion  of  — 

Percentage  of— 

Number 

analyses     Gliadin 
s-   nitrogen. 

Glutenin 
nitrogen. 

Gliadin. 

Glutenin. 

Proteid 
nitrogen. 

.Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Below  1  

0.484 
1.166 
1.385 
1.619 
1.889 
2.130 
2.374 
2.947 

11  |       0.276 
3  j          .914 
10  !          .  741 
18  i          .852 
37  j        1.044 
39           1.187 
12           1.268 
7           1.588 

0.208 
.252 
.645 
.767 
.845 
.643 
1.105 
1.358 

0.562 
.793 
.536 
.523 
.552 
.557 
.535 
.534 

0.438 
.207 
.463 
.477 
.448 
.443 
.465 
.466 

2.93 
2.89 
2.90 
2.65 
2.82 
3.05 
3.16 
3.98 

2.448 
1.721 
1.518 
1.037 
.920 
.921 
.791 
1.029 

1  to  1.25 

1  25  to  1.50  

1.50  to  1.75.. 

1.75  to  2 

2  to  2.25  

2.25  to  2.50 

2.50  and  over  

It  will  be  seen  from  Table  24  that  the  ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin 

remains  practically  the  same  as  the  percentage  of  their  sum  increases. 

It  would  therefore  be  safe  to  assume  that  an  ii  crease  in  the  gluten 


BREEDING  TO  INCREASE  PROTEID  NITROGEN.        95 

- 

content  of  a  given  variety  of  wheat  raised  in  the  same  region  would 
(airy  with  it  a  corresponding  improvement  in  its  value  for  bread 
making,  although  there  might  be  fluctuations  from  year  to  year  in 
quality  of  gluten,  as  there  is  in  the  quantity. 

If  the  quality  of  gluten  is  determined  by  the  ratio  of  gliadin  and 
glutenin  of  which  it  is  composed,  it  is  likely  that  there  is  some  certain 
proportion  that  is  most  desirable.  Unfortunately,  the  investigators 
who  have  taken  up  this  subject  do  not  by  any  means  agree  upon  the 
proper  ratio.  Should  this  be  ascertained  there  would  be  ample  oppor- 
tunity for  the  selection  of  individual  plants  in  which  the  proportion 
of  gliadin  and  glutenin  would  approximate  the  ideal.  There  would 
thus  be  possible  a  much  more  rapid  improvement  in  the  quality  of 
wheat  than  can  be  accomplished  by  confining  selection  to  an  increase 
in  the  gluten. 

An  obstacle  to  the  usefulness  of  these  determinations  in  the  whole 
wheat  appears  in  the  announcement  by  Nasmith,  already  cited,  that 
while  gliadin  occurs  in  all  portions  of  the  endosperm,  glutenin  does 
not  appear  in  the  aleurone  cells.  That  being  the  case,  it  is  difficult  to 
believe  that  any  given  ratio  between  these  constituents  in  the  whole 
wheat  could  be  taken  as  the  one  most  desirable.  The  ratio  in  the 
gluten  alone  may,  however,  have  an  important  influence  on  its 
quality,  and  a  certain  definite  proportion  of  each  may  produce  an 
ideal  gluten. 

In  the  light  of  the  present  knowledge  on  the  subject,  a  mechanical 
determination  of  gluten  would  seem  to  be  most  useful,  if  it  can  be 
made  with  such  small  quantities  of  wheat  as  are  obtained  from 
single  plants,  while  determinations  of  gliadin  and  glutenin  in  the 
gluten  would  afford  a  means  of  judging  of  its  quality. 

SOME    RESULTS    OF    BREEDING    TO   INCREASE   THE    CONTENT   OF 
PROTEID  NITROGEN. 

Selected  plants  have  been  grown  on  a  large  scale  for  two  years. 
From  these  results  it  is  very  apparent  that  a  high  percentage  of 
nitrogen  and  the  qualities  that  go  with  it  are  transmissible  from  one 
generation  to  another. 

In  Table  25  are  analyses  of  the  plants  of  the  crop  of  1902,  grouped 
according  to  their  proteid  nitrogen  content  into  classes  of  from  1  to  2 
per  cent,  2  to  2.5  per  cent,  and  increasing  by  0.5  per  cent  up  to  4.5 
per  cent  and  above.  Opposite  the  plant  number  of  each  plant  of  the 
crop  of  1902  are  stated  its  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  and  weight 
of  proteid  nitrogen  in  kernels.  On  the  same  line  are  the  plant 
numbers  for  the  entire  progeny  in  1903,  and  following  these  are  the 
percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen,  weight-  of  prote-id  nitrogen  per  average 
kernel,  and  average  weight  of  kernel  for  all  of  these  progeny. 

The  averages  for  each  group  are  given  in  Table  26. 


96 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  25. — Analyses  showing  transmission  or  nitrogen  from  one  generation  to  another." 
1  TO  2  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


19O2 

19O3 

Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 

(gram).    < 

Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 

32201 

1.51 

32206-7 

2.64 
2.62 
2.17 
2.39 
2.50 
2.586 
3.09 
2.628 
2.814 
2.67 
2.576 
2.27 
1.87 
2.85 
2.498 

0.0010055 
.  0015963 
.0007499 
.0009348 
.  0003874 
.0016918 
.  0010830 
.0024129 
.  0024540 
.0006790 
.0022132 
.0008092 
.  0016125 
.  0025361 
.0026506 

0.03874 
.  07560 
.03502 
.03894 
.01550 
.06582 
.03513 
.09109 
.08814 
.  02543 
.08738 
.  03538 
.08851 
.08899 
.10605 

32601 

1.99 

32605-6  and  8.  .  . 
63505-6. 

63501  

.98 

69501 

.94 
97 

69505-6 

69701 

69705 

73301  

91901 

.12, 
.83 
.33 

73306-8 

91905-6 

92401  

92405-9. 

92901 

.67 
38 

92905-9 

94101 

94105 

94201  
94401 

:es 

.73 

89 



94205-9 

94406-7 

94601 

... 

91605-6 

94901  .  .  . 
95501  

.99 
1.92 

94905-9 

95505-10.  .  . 

Average.  . 

Average  . 

1.658 

2.587 

.0004960 

.019907 



i 

a  In  this  table  the  average  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  for  all  plants  raised  in  1903,  resulting  from 
plants  of  1  to  2  per  cent,  2  to  2.5  per  cent,  etc.,  in  1902  is  determined  by  adding  together  analyses  of 
all  plants  in  that  group  and  dividing  by  the  total  number,  irrespective  of  families. 


2  TO  2.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17401 

2.45 

1740f5-61  f  8-1  01 

2  646 

0  0025803 

0  09807 

34201 

2  28 

34205-8 

2  857 

0023077 

08075 

57301  . 

2.33 

0.  000601 

0.  02585 

57305-8. 

2  54 

0018351 

07010 

Average.  . 

2.353 

.000601 

.02585 

Average  . 

2.68 

.00051716 

.019146 

2.5  TO  3  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


21701 

2.50 

21705-11 

2  78 

0  0042343 

0  15101 

33401  

2.73 

33405-8  

1.977 

.  0014277 

.  07274 

Average 

2.615 

Average 

2  487 

0005147 

02032 

3  TO  3.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


17301  

3.04 

17305-8... 

3.207 

0.  0025519 

0.  07920 

17501 

3.14 

17505-7 

4.006 

.0021778 

05595 

18901 

3  31 

18905-6 

3  64 

0010439 

02863 

20701  

3.22 

20705-10  . 

2.86 

.  0034181 

.12074 

20801 

3.49 

20805 

3.32 

0006999 

02157 

21301  

3.05 

21305-8  

3.015 

.  0021798 

.  07278 

21801..... 

3.10 

21805-13 

3.13 

.  0064513 

.  17668 

21901 

3  17 

3  527 

0060008 

16783 

26901  

3.28 

26905-9 

2.768 

.  00259^3 

.  09357 

27001  

3.24 

27005 

2.63 

.0004984 

01895 

27201 

3  12 

27205-7 

2  56 

0016114 

06314 

27301  .  .  . 

3.00 

27305-8. 

2.93 

.  0022229 

28801  

3.31 

28805-6 

2  96 

.0013685 

04623 

33101 

3  06 

33105-7 

2  73 

0015199 

05574 

33301  

3.33 

33305 

3.41 

.  0007126 

.  02090 

33601 

3.22 

33605-7 

2  606 

0017186 

06614 

34401 

3  08 

0  000909 

0  02956 

34405 

4  33 

0008635 

01994 

34601  

3.46 

.000948 

.  02749 

34606 

3.12 

.  0006904 

.  02213 

36901 

3.18 

.000827 

.02602  , 

36905 

3  88 

0007295 

01880 

37301  .  .  . 

3.13 

.000854 

.02731 

37305  

2.96 

.  0005881 

.  01987 

37701  

3.44 

.000685 

.  01995 

37705-7 

2.  636 

.  0015390 

.05837 

37901 

3  21 

000831 

02599 

3790.5-6 

2  48 

0009112 

03641 

38501  

3.09 

.000844 

.  02732 

3850.5-6  

3.25 

.  0013476 

.04227 

38701   .  .  .. 

3.33 

.000693 

.02081 

38706 

2.59 

.  0005148 

.01988 

39401 

3  31 

000933 

02820  i 

39405 

2  88 

0006027 

02093 

40201  .  .  . 

3.11 

.001017 

.03271 

40205.  . 

4.69 

.  0008776 

.01871 

40301.. 

3.11 

.000914 

.02942 

40305... 

3.11 

.0006255 

.02011 

BRKKDING    TO    INCREASE    PROTEID    NITROGEN. 


TABLE  25. — Analyses  showing  transmission  of  nitrogen  from  one  generation  to  another — 

Continued. 

3  TO  3.5  PKR  CK.VT  PROTK1D  NITROGEN— Continued. 


1902 

19O3 

Pens 
ag* 

Record  nura-      profc 
her.             nitro 
inke 
nel 

"f"       P[oteidn      Weight  of 
:  ,       nitrogen        avJrrae« 

in    ^m?!*5        toSSS" 
-        (gra™).         ^am>- 

Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 

in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 

40401                               3 

{2           0.001039          0.03136 
23             .001050             .03250 
16             .000972             .02813 
J7             .000933             .02766 
M             .000907             .02800 
J7             .000772             .02299 
G             .000899             .02701 
16             .000853  I          .02704 
19             .001005             .02882 
16             .000866             .02748 
J6             .000820  !          .02445 
13             .000888             .02595 
19             .000791             .02488 
.Of*'                  .02797 
J3             .000789             .02377 
»             .000902             .02928 
15             .000928             .02697 
25             .000859             .02661 
)5             .000930             .03052 
>2             .000805             .02507 
*5             .000808             .02485 
10             .000787             .02548 
to            .000958             .02860 
»             .000894             .02941 
50             .0<X>                  .02381 
.000781             .02485 
4             .«>"-                 .02665 
53             .000920            .02S46 
)6             .000723             .02379 
0             .000990             .03000 
4 

40405 

3.17 
2.82 
2.54 
3.17 
2.92 
4.13 
2.73 
2.38 
3.08 
3.065 
3.06 
2.70 
3.24 
3.17 
1.34 
3.255 
2.83 
2.27 
2.558 
2.75 
2.495 
2.706 
2.76 
2.49 
2.60 
2.88 
2.95 
3.01 
2.43 
2.14 
3,25 
2.925 
3.25 
4.42 
3.74 
2.47 
3.155 
4.04 
2.937 
3.01 
2.48 
1.98 
2.78 
2.486 
3.40 
1.81 
2.965 
2.94 
2.48 
2.875 
2.63 
2.595 
2.566 
2.74 
2.67 
3.93 
2.58 

0.0004352 
.0006892 
.0008988 
.0065447 

.0006594 
.0006423 
.0016171 
.0004567 
.0012867 
.0021730 
.0010077 
.0004877 
.0006149 
.0010793 
.0002422 
.0023714 
.0010373 
.0017313 
.  0028162 
.0014369 
.0025326 
.0013974 
.0002527 
.0019599 
.0021279 
.0006767 

.OOOMI.-.J 

!  0003258 

.0003292 
.0007684 
;  0003938 
.0024199 
.0017773 
.0008767 
.0016495 
.UN,  .-,.-,;.;  i 
.0019005 
.0021643 
.0026515 
!  0005738 
.  0003930 
;  0004054 
.0014234 
.  0013768 
!  0009400 
.  0003919 
.  00ia576 
!  0005704 
!  0005067 
.0011244 
.0007560 
.0008522 
.0026832 
.0009933 
!  0020214 
.0012908 
.0013009 

0.01373 
.  02444 
.03231 
.01866 
.02258 
.01555 
.05890 
.01919 
.01235 
.07253 
.03287 
.01798 
.01898 
.03329 
.01804 
.07295 
.03688 
.07496 
.11169 
.05233 
.  10169 
.05174 
.00916 
.07892 
.08396 
.02318 
.02730 
.01082 
.01355 
.03592 
.01212 
.08003 
.05529 
.01984 
.  04373 
.02239 
.06899 
.05274 
.08981 
.01906 
.01585 
.02047 
.05084 
.05562 
.02912 
.02165 
.03583 
.01940 
.02043 
.03902 
.02937 
.03244 
.11179 
.03625 
.07575 
.03223 
.0.5017 

lio.ni  3. 

40505 

4')-J01                                 3. 

42205-6 

42901                             3 

42905 

134(11  3. 

43405 

43501  3., 
44601  3. 

43505  

44605-7. 

48101  3. 
48301                              3  ' 

1  48106 

i  48305-6 

48.501  3. 

1  48505-8 

48701      .                        3  , 

I  48705-6 

48801  3. 

1  48806.. 

49501  3. 
50701                              3  « 

i  49505 

i  50705-6 

51001  3.  . 

51005 

55001  ...                        3.  ( 

55005-8 

55201                              3  ' 

55205-6 

55301  3. 

55305-8 

55901...                        3  ( 

55905-9 

56101  3.: 

56105-7 

56201  ...                        3.  : 

'  56205-9 

57001                              3 

57005  7 

57101  3.  J 

57105 

57401                              3  ; 

57405-8 

57.501  3.  .' 

57506-9  
58206-7 

58201    .                          3  1 

58501                              3 

58505 

58701  3.1 

58705 

58901                              3  ( 

58905 

59601  3.J 

59605-6  
fiocn^ 

62801...                        3  ] 

65301                              3  1 

.=;                                                 fi_:«n.T_s 

66001  3.  46 

66005-6  8 

69301                              3  1 

s> 

69305 

69801  3.1fi 

69805-6 

71901  ....                    3  C 

>2 

71905 

72401  3.  22      . 

72405-6 

72601  3.  1 

7 

72605-7 

72701  3.  ( 
72801  3.5 

»3      

72705-8  

1 

72806 

72901  3.  5 

•6 

72905 

74301.                            3  1 

3 

74305 

74501  3.  25 

74506-8 

74601  3.  1 
76201  3.C 

- 

74605-7  

16 

76205-6 

80301  3  : 

3 

80305 

81401  .  .                          33 

,, 

81405-6 

81501  3.  42 

81505 

84401  33 

9 

84405 

84901                              3  1 

A 

84905-6 

85201  3.36 

85205-6     

86101  33 

8 

86105-6 

88601                              3  2 

4 

88605-9 

88901  3  14 

88905-6  

92201.                            3  4 

g 

92205-8     

92301                              3  4 

g 

92305-6 

95701                              3  2 

9 

95705-7 

Average  . 

Average  .         3.2 

39           .000875             .02700 

2.932 

.00056037 

.019189 

3.5  TO  4  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITRO* -I.N 


3.55   . 

J  18805... 

2.02 

0.0003164 

0.  01567 

21201 

3.50 

21205-12  . 

3.567 

0064768 

.15672 

22201 

3  65 

22205-11 

3.165 

m  ;7n4" 

.  11711 

25201 

3  63 

05-6 

2  735 

0011894 

.04347 

26101  





3.  19 

.05113 

27501 

3.58 

27505-9  

2.688 

.0028791 

.  10761 

27889— No.  78—05- 


98  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

TABLE  25. — Analyses  showing  transmission  of  nitrogen  from  one  generation  to  another — 

Continued. 

3.5  TO  4  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN— Continued. 


1903 

19O3 

Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Record  num- 
ber. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
.   (gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 

33901 

3.59 

3.82 
3.79 
3.98 
3.65 
3.55 
3.63 
3.57 
3.79 
3.87 
3.55 
3.87 
3.53 
3.61 
3.55 
3.79 
3.76 
3.80 
3.64 
3.80 
3.53 
3.91 

33905-6.  . 

2.21 
2.84 
3.718 
2.11 
2.975 
2.37 
3.07 
2.94 
3.58 
2.365 
4.18 
1.84 
2.90 
3.62 
2.846 
2.555 
2.37 
2.87 
3.18 
2.31 
1.87 
2.82 
2.27 
3.21 
3.32 

0.  0008932 
.0005135 
.  0036318 
.  0004407 
.0013536 
.0003177 
.0006927 
.0005187 
.  0004927 
.0006777 
.  0007155 
.0002700 
.  0020794 
.  0010640 
.0016285 
.  0022356 
.0015451 
.  0005207 
.  0003556 
.0009317 
.0003180 
.0016570 
.0031019 
.0007197 
.0017483 

0.04115 
.  01808 
.09917 
.  02089 
.  04568 
.01341 
.  02251 
.01764 
.  01376 
.02995 
.01712 
.  01234 
.07511 
.  02939 
.  05743 
.08822 
.06535 
.01814 
.01118 
.04048 
.  01701 
.  05951 
.  13635 
.  02242 
.  05312 

38001 

0.000806 
.  001046 
.  001039 
.  001048 
.000927 
.001327 
'.  000796 
.001020 
.  001238 
.000865 
.001146 
.000993 
.001043 
.001020 
.  001050 
.001030 
.000891 
.000852 
.000904 
.000759 

0.02110 
.  02765 
.02616 
.  02877 
.02619 
.  02838 
.02531   1 
.02690 
.03205 
.02435 
.02963 
.  02822 
.02898 
.02866 
.02775 
.02750 
.02353 
.02348 
.02384 
.02155 

38005 

38601  

38605-9  

39201 

39205. 

39501 

39506-7 

39601  

42401 

39606  

42405 

44501  

44505  

45001 

45005  

45605-6 

45601 

45701  

45801 

45705  

45805  

48405-9 

48401 

49901 

49905  

55.501 

55506-8 

55601   

55605-8  
57606-8  

57601 

57801 

57805 

57901       

57905  

58801 

58805-6 

60601  

60605  

63101 

63105-7. 

81701 

3.78 
3.57 
3.56 

1    81705-10 

91301     

91305  

92501 

92505-7 

Average  . 

Average  . 

3.68 

.000990 

.  026.50 

2.  906         .  0005508 

.  019204 

4  TO  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


26801 

4.07 

26805-8.  . 

2.825 

0.  0023073 

0.  08179 

28201 

4  30 

28206 

3.07 

.  0006126 

.  01996 

46101  

4.00 

0.000988 

0.02472 

46105-7  

2.69 

.  0014772 

.  05495 

Average  . 

4.123 

.000988 

.02472 

Average  . 

2.806 

.  0005496 

.  019588 

MORE  THAN  4.5  PER  CENT  PROTEID  NITROGEN. 


50901 

4.95 

0.  001074 

0.02171 

50905-6  

3.435 

0.  0008992 

0.  02001 

Average  . 

Average  . 

3.  435 

.  0004496 

.010005 

'  I 

TABLE  26. — Summary  of  analyses,  showing  transmission  of  nitrogen  from  one  generation  to 

another. 


1 

9O2 

1 

903 

Range  of  percentage  of 
proteid  nitrogen. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Num- 
ber of 
analy- 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

1  to  2 

1.66 

15 

2  59 

46 

0  0004960 

0  01991 

2  to  2.5  

2.35 

3 

0.000601 

0.  02585 

2.68 

13 

.  0005172 

.01915 

2.  5  to  3          

2.61 

2 

2.49 

11 

.0005147 

.  02032 

3  to  3  5 

3  24 

84 

000875 

02700 

2  93 

199 

0005604 

01919 

3.  5  to  4  

3.68 

31 

.000990 

.02650 

2.91 

79 

.  0005508 

.01920 

4  to  4.5  ..              

4.  12 

3 

.000988 

.  02472 

2.81 

8 

.  0005496 

.  01959 

4.  5  and  over 

4  95 

1 

001074 

02171 

3  43 

2 

0004496 

01000 

BREEDING    TO    INCREASE    PROTEID    NITROGEN. 


99 


In  Table  26  the  averages  for  each  group  are  stated.  This  table  is 
designed  to  show  whether  there  has  been  a  tendency  for  plants  of  a 
certain  class  to  reproduce  the  qualities  pertaining  to  that  class,  or 
whether  these  are  lost  in  the  offspring. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  there  are  not  a  greater  number  of  analyses  of 
plants  of  medium  and  of  low  nitrogen  content.  The  plants  selected 
for  reproduction  in  1903  were  largely  those  of  high  nitrogen  content, 
and,  consequently,  comparatively  few  analyses  of  the  low  nitrogen 
and  medium  nitrogen  plants  of  1903  are  at  hand. 

Table  25  shows  that  in  the  main  there  is  a  tendency  for  each  class 
of  plants  to  reproduce  in  the  same  relation  to  the  other  classes,  but 
that  there  is  less  difference  between  the  extreme  classes  in  the  off- 
spring than  in  the  parent  plants.  In  other  words,  while  all  plants 
tend  to  reproduce  their  own  qualities,  those  plants  varying  widely 
from  the  average  produce,  in  general,  offspring  varying  from  the 
average  less  widely  than  did  the  parents.  Although  this  is  a  rule,  its 
application  to  the  individual  is  not  universal.  Certain  plants  may  be 
found  whose  tendency  to  variation  extends  through  both  generations. 
There  is  also  wide  variation  between  certain  plants  of  the  same 
parent.  For  instance,  the  plants  numbered  from  21205  to  21212,  all 
of  which  come  from  the  same  parent,  vary  from  2.16  to  5.23  per  cent 
in  proteid  nitrogen  content,  while  plants  69805  and  69806  vary  from 
5.82  to  1.66  per  cent  in  this  constituent." 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  entirely  reasonable  to  believe  that  a  very 
considerable  increase  in  the  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  wheat  may  be 
effected  by  careful  and  continuous  reproduction  from  plants  of  high 
proteid  nitrogen  content. 

Table  27  contains  the  analyses  of  plants  raised  in  1902  and  their 
progeny  raised  in  1903,  arranged  according  to  the  number  of  grams  of 
proteid  nitrogen  contained  in  the  average  kernel  of  the  former. 

TABLE  27.— Analyses  showing  transmission  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  average  kernel. 


Range  of  proteid  nitrogen 
in   average  kernel 
(gram). 

1903                           | 

19O3 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Weight 
of  aver-  • 
age  ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

0.000600  to  0  000700 

0.000659 
.000776 
!  000660 
.000888 

.001077 

3 
9 

18 
18 
15 

3.03 
.      3.29 
3.33 
3.37 
3.71 

0.02220 
.02405 
.02576 
.02796 
.02880 

0.000496 
.000444 
.000.544 
.000614 

.000593 

8 
15 
38 
35 
28 

2.59 
2.68 
2.91 
2.89 
3.06 

0.  01895 
.01673 
.01875 
.01784 
.01905 

0.000700  to  0.000800  

0.000800  to  0.000900        .    .  . 

0.000900  to  0  001000 

0.001000  and  over 

«  Table  25  represents  the  properties  of  each  plant  grown  in  1903  arranged  according  to 
immediate  families.  For  instance,  plants  numbered  17305-17308  are  all  the  offspring  of 
the  same  plant  grown  in  1902.  The  parent  bears  the  number  17301.  This  is  the  system 
of  records  devised  by  Prof.  W.  M.  Hays,  formerly  of  the  University  of  Minnesota. 


100 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  28. — Analyses  showing  transmission  of  kernel  weight. 


Range  of  weight  of  aver- 
age kernel  (gram)  . 

19O3 

19O3 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Weight 

of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 

Below  0.024 

0.02253 
.02515 
.  02709 
.  02878 
.  03152 

12 
12 
18 
16 
6 

3.61 
3.28 
3.43 
3.41 
3.31 

0.000811  ! 
.000813 
.000927 
.000993 
.  001044 

0.01684 
.01740 
.01947 
.01875 
.01869 

19 
28 
38 
31 
12 

2.69 
2.88 
2.91 
2.98 
2.96 

0.  000450 
.000503 
.000562 
.000573 
.000548 

0  024  to  0  026 

0.026  to  0.028  

0  028  to  0.030 

0  030  and  over 

Table  28  shows  the  analyses  of  plants  raised  in  1902  and  their  prog- 
eny raised  in  1903,  arranged  according  to  weight  of  average  kernel. 
There  is  more  variation  in  this  table  than  in  the  preceding  one,  but 
the  tendency  toward  transmission  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average 
kernel  may  be  noted.  The  averages  for  1902  are  much  higher  than 
for  1903,  owing  partly  to  the  higher  percentage  and  partly  to  greater 
kernel  weight. 

The  weight  of  the  average  kernel  shows  some  tendency  toward 
transmission,  although  there  are  some  variations.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  the  kernels  average  much  heavier  in  1902  than  in  1903,  and  that 
in  spite  of  this  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  is  higher  in  1902. 
The  relation  of  light  kernel  and  high  percentage  of  nitrogen  does  not 
therefore  appear  to  hold  as  between  crops  of  different  years. 

All  of  the  qualities  of  which  determinations  have  been  made  in 
both  years  appear  to  be  transmitted.  It  may  be  safely  assumed  that 
certain  plants  will  have  greater  power  to  transmit  these  qualities  than 
will  the  average  plant.  Such  plants  will  assert  themselves  in  the 
course  of  three  or  four  generations.  From  these  plants  individuals 
may  be  selected  that  have  a  combination  of  the  desired  qualities. 

YIELD  OF  GRAIN  AS  AFFECTED  BY  SUSCEPTIBILITY  TO  COLD. 

As  has  already  been  stated,  a  large  number  of  plants  on  the  breed- 
ing plots  were  killed  during  the  winter  of  1902-3.  This  afforded  an 
opportunity  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  the  severe  weather  upon  the 
surviving  plants.  The  question  arose  whether  the  surviving  plants  of 
a  family  of  which  a  large  percentage  of  members  were  killed  yielded 
less  per  plant  than  the  plants  of  a  family  of  which  but  a  small  per- 
centage had  succumbed.  As  each  spike  of  the  crop  of  1902  was 
represented  by  a  number  of  plants,  and  as  records  of  each  plant 
were  available,  there  were  very  extensive  data  at  hand  from  which 
to  secure  information  on  the  subject. 

In  Table  29  the  surviving  plants  of  each  immediate  family,  or,  in 
other  words,  the  surviving  plants  descended  from  the  same  plant  of 
the  previous  year,  are  classified  according  to  the  percentage  of  plants 
that  survived  the  winter.  Thus  all  plants  of  which  only  from  10  to  20 


YIELD    AS    AFFECTED    BY    SUSCEPTIBILITY    TO    COLD. 


101 


per  cent  survived  are  grouped  together.  In  the  next  class  are  all 
plants  of  which  from  20  to  30  per  cent  survived.  The  other  classes 
increase  by  10  per  cent  surviving  plants  until  70  per  cent  is  reached. 
All  plants  of  which  more  than  70  per  cent  survived  forni  the  last  class. 

Table  30  gives  a  summary  of  Table  29,  the  averages  for  each  class 
being  shown.  From  this  table  it  will  be  seen  that  with  an  increase 
in  the  proportion  of  surviving  plants  there  is  an  increase  in  the 
weight  of  grain  per  plant  and  in  the  number  of  kernels  per  plant. 
It  is  therefore  to  be  concluded  that  decrease  in  yield  from  winter- 
killing is  due  not  only  to  the  loss  of  plants  that  are  destroyed,  but 
also  to  a  decreased  yield  from  most  of  the  surviving  plants. 

Table  30  also  shows  that  the  weight  of  the  average  kernel  is  not 
affected  by  the  freezing  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  family,  the 
decreased  yield  being  due,  it  may  be  assumed,  to  the  decreased 
number  of  kernels,  owing  to  a  decreased  ability  to  tiller. 

With  an  increase  in  the  proportion  of  surviving  plants  there  is, 
perhaps,  a  slight  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  in 
the  kernels  and  in  the  number  of  grams  of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the 
average  kernel,  although  this  is  so  slight  and  so  irregular  that  it 
would  not  be  safe  to  draw  any  conclusions  from  it.  The  total  pro- 
duction of  proteid  nitrogen  per  plant  naturally  increases. 

TABLE  29. — Yields  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  killed  in  each  family. 
10  TO  20  PER  CENT. 


Percent- 
age of 

Record  number      P!a,™o 
for  1902.             S^V3_ 

ing  from 
1902. 

Weight 
of  ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

18801                               11.1 

2.  1462 

137 

0.01567 

2.02 

0.04335 

0.0003164 

20801  10.0 

14.  6942 

697 

.02157 

3.32 

.48784 

.0006999 

2.5201                                 18.  2 

7.7295 

363 

.02173 

2.73 

.  20732 

.0005947 

33301  16.7 

2.9905 

156 

.01858 

2.  73 

.07566 

.0005066 

37301  16..7 
38001                                 14.3 

6.1394 
2.5134 

309 
139 

.01987 
.01808 

2.9i) 
2.84 

.  18173 
.07138 

.000o881 
.0005135 

39201  16.7 
39401                                 16.7 

21.5399 
9.3541 

1,031 
447 

.02089 
.02093 

2.11 

2.88 

.45435 

.21390 

.0004407 
.0006027 

10201  14.3 

3.6302 

194 

.01871 

4.69 

.  17026 

.  0008776 

10401                                   16.7 

.6316 

46 

.01373 

3-17 

.02002 

.0004352 

42901...                            16.7 

1.2499 

87 

.01866 

3.17 

.03650 

.000,5447 

43401...                            16.7 

2.8000 

124 

.02258 

2.92 

.08176 

.0006594 

44501                                   16.7 

5.9990 

340 

.01764 

2.94 

.  17637 

.0005187 

45001  16.7 

3.2340 

235 

.01376 

3.58 

.llfTB 

.0004927 

45701                                 14.  3 

.7532 

44 

.01712 

4.18 

.03148 

.0007155 

45801  16.7 

1.5298 

124 

.01234 

1.84 

.02815 

.0002700 

49501  .  .                  .           14.  3 

1.2716 

67 

.01898 

3.24 

.04120 

.0006149 

49901                                 14.3 

.6760 

23 

.02939 

3.  62 

.02436 

.0010640 

51001  16.7 

15.5835 

862 

.01804 

1.34 

.20881 

.0002422 

57101                                 16.  7 

3.7263 

407 

.00916 

2.76 

.10285 

.0002527 

58501                                 16.7 

7.  45  Hi 

273 

.02730 

2.95 

.21982 

.0008052 

58701...                              |f,.7 

2.5436 

235 

.01082 

3.01 

.07656 

.0003258 

58901  1*1.7 

2.3031 

170 

.01355 

2.43 

.05596 

.0003292 

60601..                               Hi.  7 

.5952 

35 

.01701 

1.87 

.01113 

.0003180 

62801                                   Hi.  7 

L.3451 

111 

.01212 

3.25 

.04272 

.0003938 

69301                                   Hi  7 

2.0430 

103 

.01984 

4.42 

.09030 

.0008767 

74301  .-  Hi.  7 

4.4222 

216 

.02047 

1.98 

.087.56 

.0004054 

84401  16.7 
91301                                   14.3 

8.  7448 
3.0940 

428 
138 

.02043 
.02242 

2.48 
3.21 

.21687 
.09932 

.0005067 
.0007197 

94101                                   14.3 

.5595 

22 

.02543 

2.67 

.01494 

.0006790 

Average..         l.">.7* 

4.7098 

251.4 

.01856 

2.91 

.12294 

.00051386 

102 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  29. —  Yields  ofplante,  arranged  according  to  percentage  kitted  in  each  family — Cont'd. 

20  TO  30  PER  CENT. 


• 

Record  number 
for  1902. 

Percent- 
age of 
plants 
in  1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 

Weight 
of  ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid  * 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

18901 

20.0 

1.2046 

84" 

0.01431 

3.64 

0.04437 

0.  0005219 

27001 

20.0 

16.4120 

866 

.  01895 

2.63 

.43164 

.0004984 

34601  

28.6 

6.  1962 

280 

.  02213 

3.12 

.  19332 

.0006904 

36901 

20.0 

5.0200 

267 

.01880 

3.88 

.  19478 

.0007295 

39601 

28.6 

4.  6383 

346 

.01341 

2  37 

.10967 

.0003177 

40301  

25.0 

3.6003 

179 

.02011 

3.11 

.11197 

.  0006255 

40501 

20.0 

4.  1546 

170 

.  02444 

2.82 

.11716 

.  0006892 

42201  

25.0 

1.0827 

59 

.01615 

2.54 

.03587 

.  0004494 

42401 

20.0 

1.4892 

66 

.  02251 

3.07 

.04572 

.0006927 

43501  

25.0 

1.4464 

93 

.  01555 

4.13 

.05974 

.  0006423 

48701. 

28.6 

5.2800 

321 

.  01643 

3.06 

.  16124 

.0005038 

48801 

25.0 

9.8346 

547 

.  01798 

2.70 

.  26553 

.  0004877 

57801  

20.0 

4.8988 

270 

.01814 

2.87 

.14060 

.  0005207 

57901 

25.0 

2.  4731 

221 

.01118 

3.18 

.  07859 

.  0003556 

58801  

28.6 

12.  5470 

626 

.  02024 

2.31 

.33541 

.0004658 

71901       

20.0 

28.  2136 

1,260 

.  02239 

2.47 

.69688 

.  0005531 

80301 

20.0 

l.r>.  7835 

729 

.  02165 

1.81 

.  28569 

.0003919 

81501  

20.0 

2.8327 

146 

.01940 

2.94 

.  08328 

.  0005704 

91901 

22.2 

3.4961 

199 

.  01756 

3.09 

.  10771 

.0005415 

94601  

28.6 

6.  2877 

106 

.  04425 

1.87 

.11373 

.  0008062 

Average  .  . 

23.5 

6.  84457 

341.75 

.019779 

2.88 

.  18065 

.0005527 

30  TO  40  PER  CENT. 


26101 

33.3 

1.9790 

122 

0.01704 

3.19 

0.  06318 

0.0005091 

28201  

33.3 

4.3698 

219 

.  01996 

3.07 

.  13415 

.0006126 

28801  

33.3 

8.3240 

386 

.02311 

2.96 

.25019 

.  0006842 

33901 

33.3 

6.  7169 

313 

.  02057 

2  21 

.  12186 

.  0004466 

37901  

33.3 

.5757 

28 

.01820 

2.48 

.01447 

.  0004556 

38501 

37.5 

5.  03306 

252 

.01814 

3.25 

.  24284 

.(006738 

38701  

33.3 

7.  2545 

365 

.01988 

2.59 

.  18789 

.  0005148 

48301.. 

33.3 

7.  3424 

315 

.02117 

3.08 

.  21633 

.  0006433 

50901 

33.3 

2.0631 

167 

.01000 

3.43 

.07041 

.0004496 

59601  

33.3 

8.4456 

474 

.  01796 

2.14 

.18039 

.0003842 

69701 

33.3 

3.  7810 

244 

.01550 

2.50 

.  09453 

.0003874 

88901  

33.3 

7.6051 

419 

.01812 

2.74 

.  20632 

.  00049R6 

92301  

33.3 

4.  1975 

253 

.01611 

3.93 

.18308 

.0006454 

Average  .  . 

33.6 

5.2065 

273.6 

.01813 

2.89 

.  15125 

.0005310 

40  TO  50  PER  CENT. 


17501  . 

42.9 

1.  1495 

55 

0.  01865 

4.01 

0.  04268 

0.  0007259 

21301 

44.4 

4.6950 

259 

.01819 

3.01 

.  14144 

.  000o449 

33101  

42.9 

2.9905 

156 

.01858 

2.73 

.  07566 

.0005066 

44601 

42.9 

1.8251 

93 

.  01963 

2.73 

.0*998 

.0005390 

50701  

40.0 

.5329 

32 

.01664 

3.17 

.01712 

.  OOU5396 

72401 

40.0 

8.  3672 

321 

.  02946 

3.15 

.26913 

.0009502 

72801 

40.0 

2.0970 

110 

.01906 

3.01 

.06312 

.  0005738 

72901  

76201 

40.0 
40.0 

2.6462 
6.9409 

167 
472 

.01585 
.01456 

2.48 
3.40 

.06,563 
.  22024 

.  0003930 
.0004700 

81401 

40  0 

2  9064 

156 

.01791 

2  96 

07905 

0005288 

86101  

92201  . 

40.0 
44.4 

5.  3261 
4.1705 

314 

238 

.01622 
.  01894 

2.59 

2.67 

.14008 
.11199 

.0004261 
.0005053 

92501 

42  9 

5  4034 

297 

01771 

3  32 

16649 

O0058'^8  - 

94401  

*  42.9 

8.6610 

484 

.  01769 

2.27 

.20040 

.0004046 

Average  

41.7 

4.1223 

225.3 

.01843 

Ml 

.11736 

.0005493 

YIELD    AS    AFFECTED    BY    SUSCEPTIBILITY    TO    COLD. 


103 


TABLE  29. — Yields  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  kitted  in  each  family — Cont'd. 

50  TO  60  PER  CENT. 


Record  number 
for  1902. 

Percent- 
age of 
Slants 
i  1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 

Weight 
of  ker- 
nels on 
plant 

(gram). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid 
nitroge"n 
in  ker- 
nels 
(gram). 

Proteid 
nitrogen 
in  average 
kernel 
(gram). 

17301 

50.0 

3.0000 

156 

0.  01980 

3.21 

0.09556 

O.OOOP380 

17401 

54.5 

11.7777 

581 

.01961 

2  65 

30061 

0005161 

20701  

50.0 

6.6626 

327 

.02012 

2.85 

.18906 

.  0005P97 

27201 

50.0 

12.9727 

611 

.02105 

2.56 

.31509 

.0005371 

33401  

50.0 

5.2333 

27f 

.01818 

1.98 

.10621 

0003569 

33HH   

50.0 

6.0463 

273 

.02205 

2.61 

.  14759 

.0005729 

34201 

57.1 

6.8220 

328 

.02019 

2  86 

.18949 

0005769 

37701  

50.0 

4.1993 

237 

.01946 

2.64 

.12164 

.0005130 

39501 

50.0 

1.9040 

89 

.02284 

2.97 

.05663 

.0006768 

45£01 

50.0 

2.3719 

140 

.01497 

2  36 

04852 

0003388 

46101   .   . 

50.0 

4.8728 

273 

.01832 

2.69 

.13084 

.0004924 

55201 

50.0 

6.0242 

309 

.01844 

2.83 

.15608 

0005186 

57f  01  

57.1 

9.3804 

435 

.02178 

2.37 

.18680 

.0005150 

63101 

50.0 

4.7193 

224 

.01984 

2.82 

.12281 

0005523 

69801 

50.0 

7.2278 

334 

.02186 

3  74 

.17078 

0008247 

85201  

50.0 

4.2040 

295 

.01468 

2.63 

.11078 

.0003778 

88C01 

57.1 

5.6295 

266 

.02236 

2.57 

.  14178 

0005366 

Average  

51.5 

6.0616 

302.9 

.01974 

2.73 

.15237 

.0005361 

60  TO  70  PER  CENT. 


21201 

66.7 

2.5064 

137   0.  01956 

3.57 

0.09431 

0.0006846 

32201 

60.0 

5.8304 

288  i   .01937 

2  64 

11603 

0005027 

32601  

66.7 

2.9653 

166    .01890 

2.62 

.05309 

.0006177 

48101 

66.7 

11.6655 

P08    .01919 

2.38 

.  27765 

0004567 

48501  

66.7 

6.0446 

341  i   .01813 

3.06 

.  18124 

.0005437 

55001 

66.7 

8.6833 

476    .01824 

3.25 

.25347 

.0005928 

55301 

66.7 

5.4606 

280    .01874 

2  27 

12536 

0004328 

55501  

66.7 

10.4714 

529    .01914 

2.85 

.29155 

.0005428 

57001 

60.0 

5.0125 

319    .01725 

2.71 

13688 

0004658 

57301  

66.7 

7.  7761 

443    .01752 

2.54 

.20018 

.0004588 

57401 

66.7 

7.6312 

383    .01973 

2.49 

19910 

0004900 

57501 

66.7 

8.1116 

382    .02099 

2  60 

20327 

0005320 

63501  

60.0 

4.1723 

229    .01791 

2.17 

.06748 

.0003749 

66001 

66.7 

5.9586 

309    .01919 

3.25 

17590 

0005924 

72801 

60.0 

4.6412 

01758 

4  04 

14328 

0007214 

7_'701   

66.7 

9.3629 

396    .02245 

2.94 

28276 

0006629 

73301 

66.7 

7.  7977 

354    .02194 

2  59 

21334 

0005639 

74601  

60.0 

8.3679 

451    .01854 

2.49 

.20681 

0004589 

84901  
92901 

66.7 
62.5 

4.1284 
4.6848 

209    .01951 
258    01763 

2.87 
2  81 

.  13763 
12877 

.0005622 
0004908 

95701  

60.0 

5.4211 

318  !   .01672 

2  58 

.14079 

0004336 

Average  

64.6 

6.5092 

340    .01896 

2.80 

.17280 

.0005324 

70  PER  CENT  AND  OVER. 


21701... 

87.5 

9.  75524 

447  1  0.02157 

2.78   0.30200 

0.000f049 

21801  
21901 

80.0 
88  9 

11.5721 
8  3406 

622    .01963 
398    02114 

3.13    .35575 
3  53    30995 

.OOOC057 
0007501 

22201  
26801 

87.5 
80.0 

4.0677 
7.  1981 

229    .01674 
329    .02045 

3.16  :   .12P04 
2.82    .20306 

.0005292 
.0005768 

WOO!  . 

71.4 

3.8910 

206    .01871 

2.  77    .  10870 

.0005189 

27301  .  . 

80.0 

6.6162 

343    .01913 

2.93    .18438 

.0005447 

27501 

71.4 

6.8618 

310    .02152 

2.69    .17267 

.0005758 

38601  
48401  

55601 

71.4 
83.3 
83.3 

3.9532 
4.4668 
10.2785 

1-i    .01983 
277    .01502 
435    .02211 

3.72    .11558 
2.90    .10033 
2.  55    .  29008 

.0007264 
.0004159 
.0005589 

55901  

83.3 

10.  9242 

489    .02234 

2.56    .27788 

.0005632 

56101 

75.0 

10.7383 

617    .01744 

2.  75    .  29783 

.0004790 

56201 

83.3 

11.2241 

563    .  02034 

2.49    .27997 

.0005065 

58201  

75.0 

2.8084 

•J-J7    .01159 

2.88    .08385 

0003383 

65301  .      .  . 

83.3 

7.5666 

394    .02001 

2.  92    .  18248 

.0006050 

74501 

100.0 

3.4799 

191    .01695 

2.  78    .  10355 

.0004745 

81701 

100.0 

12.7593 

.02272 

2.  27    .  29500 

0005170 

92401  

71.4 

4.4131 

•-':<}    .01822 

2.P3    .12426 

.0004826 

94201  

94901  
95501 

83.3 
75.0 
100.0 

5.9603 
7.0172 

7.2956 

339    .01748 
388  ,   .01780 
:<7J    .01767 

2.58    .16548 
2.85    .21294 
2.50     18689 

.0004426 
.0005072 
0004418 

Average  

82.4 

7.3275 

371.2  i   .01902 

2.83    .20357 

1       • 

.0005348 

104 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  30. — Summary  of  yields  of  plants,  arranged  according  to  percentage  Icilled  in  each  family. 


Percentage  of  plants 
grouped  according 
to  survivors  of  1903 
from  1902. 

Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 

Percent- 
age of 
plants  in 
1903  sur- 
viving 
from  1902. 

Weight 
of  ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(grams). 

Num- 
ber of 
kernels 
per 
plant. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram) 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in  ker- 
nels. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

10  to  20 

30 
20 
13 

14 
17 
21 
22 

15.8 
23.5 
33.6 
41.7 
51.5 
64.6 
82.4 

4.7098 
6.8446 
5.2065 
4.  1223 
6.0616 
6.5092 
7.3275 

251 
342 
274 
225 
303 
340 
371 

0.  01856 
.  01978 
.01813 
.  01843 
.01974 
.01896 
.01902 

2.91 
2.88 
2.89 
2.96 
2.73 
2.80 
2.83 

0.  12294 
.18065 
.  15125 
.  11736 
.  15237 
.17280 
.  20357 

0.  0005437 
.       .  0005527 
.0005310 
.0005493 
.0005361 
.  0005324 
.0005348 

20  to  30  

30  to  40 

40  to  50 

50  to  60  

60  to  70 

70  and  over 

YIELD  AND  NITROGEN  CONTENT  OF  GRAIN  AS  AFFECTED  BY 
LENGTH  OF  GROWING  PERIOD. 

Early-maturing  varieties  of  wheat  are,  in  general,  better  yielding 
sorts  in  Nebraska  than  are  later  maturing  ones.  There  are  some 
exceptions  to  this  rule,  however,  Turkish  Red  yielding  better  than 
any  earlier  maturing  variety.  The  advantages  from  early  maturity 
have  usually  been  ascribed  to  the  cooler  weather  and  greater  supply 
of  moisture  that  obtain  in  the  early  summer.  The  hot,  dry  weather 
common  in  July  is  thought  to  prevent  the  filling  out  of  the  kernel  and 
to  cause  light  yield  and  light  volume  weight. 

Each  wheat  plant  on  the  breeding  plots  was  harvested  separately 
in  1903,  and  a  record  was  kept  of  the  date  of  harvesting  of  each  of 
these  plants.  These  data  have  been  tabulated  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  the  relation  between  the  length  of  the  growing  season  and 
the  yield  of  grain  from  individual  plants  of  the  same  variety. 

Table  31  contains  these  data,  tabulated  according  to  the  date  of 
ripening.  Plants  ripening  between  the  7th  and  llth  of  July,  1903, 
form  the  first  class,  those  ripening  between  July  11  and  15  the  second 
class,  and  the  succeeding  classes  increase  by  four  days  until  July  27,  all 
ripening  after  that  date  constituting  the  last  class.  The  dates  of 
ripening  thus  extend  over  a  period  of  three  weeks. 

The  season  of  1903  was  a  very  wet  and  cool  one.  The  effect  of 
this  upon  the  wheat  crop  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  crop  in  the 
field  was  not  ready  to  harvest  until  July  10,  while  usually  it  is  har- 
vested between  the  20th  and  30th  of  June.  Even  at  the  close  of  the 
ripening  period  the  weather  did  not  become  dry  or  hot  as  compared 
with  the  normal  season.  It  will  therefore  be  seen  that  the  ordinary 
advantages  from  early  maturity  did  not  obtain,  or  at  least  not  in  the 
customary  way.  It  may  also  be  said  that  some  of  the  later  maturing 
wheats  yielded  as  well  in  1904  as  did  the  Turkish  Red. 

Table  32  is  a  summary  of  Table  31,  with  a  statement  of  the  average 
for  each  class. 

Table  33  is  a  summary  of  the  same  plants,  tabulated  according  to 
the  yield  of  grain  per  plant. 


VIKLD,   ETC.,   AS    AFFECTED    BY    GROWING    PERIOD. 


105 


Table  34  is  a  summary  of  the  same  plants,  tabulated  according  to 
the  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen. 

It  is  very  evident  from  these  tables  that  the  early-maturing  plants 
are  the  most  prolific.  The  weight  of  the  average  kernel  remains  very 
uniform,  so  that  the  later  maturing  plants  do  not  appear  to  have  pro- 
duced shrunken  kernels.  Evidently  the  plants  ripening  during  the 
first  four  days  produced  the  largest  amounts  of  grain,  and  their  ker- 
nels were  as  heavy  as  those  produced  later.  The  smaller  productive- 
ness of  the  later  maturing  plants  in  the  season  of  1903  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  due  to  a  shrunken  or  light  kernel. 

The  percentage  of  proteid  nitrogen  appears  to  be  somewhat  less  in 
the  grain  of  the  early-maturing  plants.  The  number  of  grains  of 
proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel  is  likewise  less  in  these  early- 
mat  uring  plants. 

The  relation  of  length  of  growing  season  to  both  yield  and  compo- 
sition of  grain  is  contrary  to  what  might  have  been  supposed.  A 
long  growing  period  without  excessively  hot  or  dry  weather  might 
naturally  be  thought  to  increase  the  yield  and  increase  the  percentage 
of  carbohydrates  in  the  grain. 

The  season  of  1904  was  very  similar  to  that  of  1903  up  to  time  of 
wheat  harvest.  The  data  for  1904,  when  tabulated,  will  serve  as  a 
check  on  the  results  obtained  in  1903. 

TABLE  31 . —  Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing  period. 
DATES  RIPE:  JULY  7  TO  11,  1903. 


Date     !     Yield 

r^nt-  « 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

ripe.     I  (grams)  . 

proteid     ag!.p|er 
nitrogen.   (graem) 

v-prnpl«       Average 
els-  j     kernel. 

218  8 

Julv   10       20  9290 

2  69     0  01699 

0  56299     0  0004569 

21806  

do...      14.2450 

2.71        .02378 

.  38604       .  0006444 

21807. 

do             9.4172 

2.73       .02498 

.  25709         0006664 

21808... 
21809  

....do...      19.7446 
do             8.0214 

2.57  I     .01708 
2.73       .01919 

.50744       .0004389 
.  21898       .  0005238 

21810 

do             1  0304 

2  69         019816 

02772         0005330 

21811  

do...      11.9114 

3.  75       .  021007 

.44666       .0007877 

21812 

do           14.8139 

4.26       .01507 

.63107         0006420 

21813... 

55506.. 

....do...       4.0258 
Julv     8       17.8506 

4.04       .01877 
2.80       .02062 

.  16377       .  0007582 
.49995       .0005773 

55507  
55605  

....do...       9.8228 
do     .      10.9180 

2.63       .01949 
2.64       .02184 

.25834  1     .0005126 
-     .28823       .0005765 

55606 

do           11.0930 

2.58         02205 

.28580         0005690 

B5607.  .  . 

do...       2.3931 

2.69       .01734 

.06437  '     .0004665 

55608  

do           22.  5848 

2.  31        .  02699 

.  52194       .  0006236 

55905  
55906  

....do...       5.7948 
July     7        7.9968 

2.67       .01751 
2.81        .01603 

.15470       .0004674 
.  22471        .  0004503 

55907 

July     8       19.3966 

2.  59       .  02590 

.  50238         0006707 

55908  

do...      12.1221 

2.42       .02175 

.29575       .0005262 

55909.^... 

July     9        9.2120 

2.30       .03050 

.21187       .0007016 

56106 

July     8       12  0161 

2  57         01866 

.30881        .0004795 

56107  

July     7  !     14.4556 

2.96       .01658 

.42790       .0004907 

56206   .    .. 

July     8        9.3093 

2.  42       .  01829 

.  22529       .  0004426 

56207 

do           10  9073 

2  34       .02361 

.  25522       .  0005524 

56206.  .. 
56209 

'....do...      13.5720 
do.    .      15.8086 

2.61        .02356 
2.59       .01664 

.34616       .0006149 
.  40945       .  0004310 

81505  

Julv   10        2.8327 

2.94       .01940 

.08328       .0005704 

July     8       15.3928 

2.71       .02132 

.41715       .0005778 

17 

do           18  3614 

2  34       .02336 

.42965       .0005466 

do             7  3993 

2  41         02578 

17833         0006213 

M709  ;  

....do...      16.4692 

1                   i 

2.28       .02175 

1 

.37548       .0004960 

106 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  31. — Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  7  TO  11,  1903— Continued. 


Record  number. 

Date 
ripe. 

Yield 
(grams)  . 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram)  . 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in  — 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

81710 

July     8 
July   10 
..do..  . 

9.1411 
1.6362 
9.9456 
5.  1584 
1.5355 
9.  8719 
12.  1918 
2.3678 
3.  6977 
.3146 
11.0548 
12.  1592 
14.  4617 
2^9475 
2.  8356 
10.  3426 
5.1629 
.7577 

1.92 
2.80 
2.53 
2.61 
2.47 
2.42 
2.94 
1.96 
3.60 
2.81 
2.74 
2.59 
2.56 
2.48 
1.81 
2.54 
2.73 
2.47 

0.  02308 
.02731 
.02068 
.02205 
.02075 
.02100 
.01948 
.  01894 
.01696 
.00850 
.01852 
.  02029 
.01954 
.02136 
.01783 
.  01626 
.  01934 
.  01457 

0.  17550 
.04581 
.  25162 
.  13463 
.03793 
.23890 
.35844 
.04641 
.13312 
.00884 
.30291 
.  31492 
.37023 
.07310 
.  05132 
.  26270 
.14095 
.  01872 

0.  0004432 
.  0007640 
.0005231 
.0005754 
.0005125 
.0005082 
.0005726 
.0003713 
.0006106 
.0002389 
.0005074 
.0005515 
.0005003 
.0005297 
.  0003228 
.0004131 
.  0005279 
.  0003599 

88605  

88606       

88607 

do 

88608   

...do... 

88609 

do 

94907  

...do... 

94908 

do     . 

94909 

July     9 
do..  . 

95505         

95506  
95507  

....do... 
....do... 

95508 

do 

95509   

....do... 

95510 

do 

95705     

July   10 
do  . 

95706 

95707  

....do... 

Average  .  .  . 

July  8.  9 

9.9067 

2.69 

.02024 

.26475 

.0005356 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  11  TO  15,  1903. 


21905... 

July  13 

14.3111 

2.64 

0.01809 

0.37781 

0.  0004777 

21906    .  .  .  . 

.  .do... 

10.  4800 

3.18 

.  02563 

.33403 

.  0008168 

21907 

do 

2.9248 

3  35 

01851 

.09798 

.0006201 

21908 

do 

3  5574 

3  82 

02056 

13589 

0007^55 

21909 

do 

12.  1819 

4.43 

.  02317 

.53889 

.  0010265 

21911  

...do... 

8.  4593 

5.48 

.02209 

.46356 

.0012103 

21912      .  .. 

....do  .. 

9.  7236 

2.31 

.  01S07 

.  22461 

.  0004404 

21913  
22205  

....do... 
...do... 

10.  1925 
2.  6965 

3.01 
2.81 

.02072 
.  00953 

.  30680 
.  07577 

.0006235 
.  0002677 

22210 

do 

6.  0173 

3  17 

02019 

.19075 

.0006401 

22211  

...do... 

11.  5675 

3.17 

.02062 

.  36671 

.0006537 

27005 

do  .. 

16.4120 

2.63 

.  01895 

.  43164 

.  0004984 

27205 

do 

16  4061 

2  41 

01841 

.  39539 

0004437 

27206    

....do... 

19.  1854 

2.36 

.02469 

.  45276 

.  0005827 

27207 

do 

3  3266 

2  92 

02004 

.09712 

.0005850 

27305  

...do... 

5.  5666 

2.58 

.020<S5 

.  14362 

.  0005379 

27306 

do 

13.3011 

3  47 

01945 

.32853 

.  0004803 

27307 

do 

3  0850 

2  53 

01847 

.  07805 

0004674 

27308    

....do... 

4  5123 

4.15 

.01777 

.  18726 

.  0007373 

27505 

do 

12  0399 

2  12 

02183 

.24942 

.  0004627 

27506  
27508  

48406 

....do... 
....do... 
do 

10.0005 
5.  5524 
3  2964 

2.70 
2.64 

4  87 

.02252 
.  02287 
01324 

.  27003 
.  14608 
.16053 

.0006082 
.0006037 
0006447 

48407  

...do... 

11.2890 

1.50 

.  01572 

.  16933 

.  0002^58 

48408 

do  . 

.3485 

2.81 

.01291 

.00979 

.  0002627 

48409  
48506    

....do... 
....do... 

6.  4302 
9.4585 

2.02 
3.20 

.02048 
.01701 

.12989 
.  30267 

.0004137 
.  0005444 

48507 

do 

1.6036 

2  64 

.02296 

.  04233 

0006062 

48508  

...do... 

11:2008 

2.76 

.01858 

.  30986 

.  0005127 

48806      

do  . 

9.8346 

2  70 

.01798 

.  26553 

.  0004877 

55005  
55006  

....do... 
...do... 

7.  9684 
7.  1852 

3.05 
3.16 

.02028 
.  01593 

.24303 
.22705 

.0006185 
.0005034 

55305 

do  . 

2  5160 

2  48 

.01507 

.06240 

.  0003736 

55306... 
55307  

....do... 
....do... 

4.  1323 
5.  6864 

2.18 
1.89 

.  01931 
.  01663 

.09008 
.  10747 

.  0004210 
.0003142 

55308 

do  . 

9  5078 

2  54 

02395 

24150 

.0006225 

56105  
56205  

....do... 
....do... 

5.  7431 
6.  5232 

2.73 
2  51 

.01709 
.  01959 

.  15679 
.  16373 

.  0004667 
.  0004917 

57005 

do 

1  5364 

2  71 

01746 

04164 

0004731 

57006  
57007  

....do... 
..  .do... 

10.  1836 
3.  3176 

2.76 
2  65 

.  01453 
01975 

.28107 
08792 

.  0004010 
0005233 

57105 

do 

3  7263 

2  76 

00916 

10285 

0002527 

57305... 
57306  

....do... 
do.. 

8.  5777 
7  9772 

3.19 
2  86 

.01666 
01838 

.29188 
22815 

.  0005S26 
0005257 

57307  
57308...  

....do... 
....do... 

4.7117 

9.8378 

2.43 
1.69 

.  01801 
.01705 

.11445 
.  16626 

.  0004387 
0002881 

57405  

...do  . 

8328 

1  98 

02031 

01640 

0004022 

57406  
57407  

....do... 
....do... 

2.  4923 
14.9992 

2.75 
2.62 

.01846 
.01968 

.06864 

.39297 

.  0005077 
.  0005157 

YIELD,   ETC.,    AS    AFFECTED    BY    GROWING    PERIOD. 


107 


TABLE  31. — Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing 

period— Continued. 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  11  TO  15,  1903— Continued. 


Record  number. 

Date 
ripe. 

Yield 

(grams). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

57408... 

July  13 
....do... 

12.2004 
2.7616 
6.9861 
12.0728 
10.  6261 
3.0790 
16.4433 
8.6189 
1.3961 
4.2207 
1.8018 
9.8298 
7.0051 
11.7006 
4.4423 
12.3862 

2.61 
2.80 
2.85 
2.21 
2.54 
2.74 
1.73 
2.64 
2.67 
3.09 
4.92 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2.35 
3.41 

0.02047 
.01534 
.01946 
.03177 
.01739 
.02333 
.02234 
.01968 
.00943 
.01375 
.02310 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.01553 
.01808 

0.31842 
.07733 
.19905 
.26680 
.26990 
.08436 
.24847 
.22756 
.03728 
.13042 
.08865 
.23690 
.  15971 
.24468 
.10439 
.42236 

0.0005343 
.0004296 
.0005545 
.0007021 
.0004417 
.0006391 
.0003865 
.0005195 
.0002519 
.0004248 
.0011365 
.0004355 
.0004282 
.0004197 
.0003650 
.0006166 

57506  

57507 

do 

57508  
57509  

....do... 
....do... 

57606 

do 

57607  

...do... 

57608..    .. 

do 

58206 

do 

58207  

....do... 

65305 

do 

65306  

....do... 

65307  

do 

65308 

do 

94905  

July  11 

do 

94906   . 

Average.  . 

July   13 

7.  6611             2.  81 

.01887  i        .20820 

.0005290 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  15  TO  19,  1903. 


18906 

July  15 

0  9229 

3  48 

0  01420 

0  03212 

0  0004941 

21706  

.  .do  

19.3318 

4.71 

.02390 

.91052 

.0011283 

21707  

26105... 
33406...  . 

....do... 
....do... 
July  18 

12.3685 
1.8242 
4  6045 

2.19 
3.02 

2.87 

.02125 
.01393 
.  01627 

.27086 
.05508 
.  13215 

.0004654 
.0003662 
0004670 

34206 

do 

1  5940 

3  73 

01968 

05946 

0007340 

:;»_'"»... 

..  .do... 

2.9886 

2.13 

.01916 

.06366 

.0004081 

37906.  . 

July  15 

.2062 

2.44 

01086 

00503 

0002649 

45005 

do 

3  2340 

3  58 

01376 

11575 

000499" 

45605  

do 

.7081 

2.82 

.01161 

01997 

0003273 

48405  
48505  

....do... 
....do... 

.9701 
1.9154 

3.31 
3.66 

.01276 
.  01398 

.03211 
.  07010 

.0004225 
.0005117 

51005  

do 

15.5835 

1.34 

01804 

20881 

0002422 

63105 

July  18 

1  5452 

3  24 

01717 

05007 

0005563 

63106... 

do  

3.3006 

2.79 

.02001 

09208 

0005581 

66006  

72605... 
72806  

....do... 
....do... 
do 

6.0090 
1.1166 
2.0970 

3.54 
4.65 
3.01 

.01642 
.01718 
01906 

.21272 
.05192 
06312 

.0005812 
.0007988 
0005738 

74605  
81705... 

....do... 
.do.. 

7.  1181 
9.7922 

2.60 
1.98 

.01784 
.02106 

.18507 
19388 

.0004638 
0004170 

88905... 

July  16 

5.3069 

2  83 

01811 

15019 

0005126 

89908 

do 

9  9034 

2  65 

01814 

26245 

0004807 

91905  

do 

3.4436 

3  36 

01739 

11570 

0005844 

91906  
92206.. 

....do... 
....do... 
do 

3.5486 
5.  2616 
1.  1074 

2.81 
2.74 
2  67 

.01774 
.01525 
02407 

.09972 
.  14417 
09957 

.0004986 
.0004179 
0006428 

92207  
02208... 

....do... 
do  . 

3.6926 
6.6206 

2.55 
2.72 

.01767 
01876 

.09416 
18008 

.0004505 
0005102 

92305  

92306 

....do... 
do 

2.3859 
6  0091 

2.93 
4  93 

.01491 
01732 

.06991 
29625 

.0004369 
0008539 

92406  

do 

8.2366 

3  11 

02168 

25616 

0006741 

92407  
92408  
92409  
92506... 
92.507  
92805  
92908.. 

....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
do 

.8983 
3.7820 
5.7131 
3.8709 
9.6779 
2.7000 
2.8816 

1.66 
2.97 
2.30 
4.39 
2.58 
3.50 
2.99 

.01695 
.01827 
.01814 
.01690 
.01916 
.01.534 
01592 

.'01491 
.11233 
.13140 
.16993 
.24969 
.09450 
08616 

.0002814 
.0005426 
.0004171 
.0007421 
.0004944 
.0005369 
0004760 

92907  
92908... 

92909  

....do... 
....do... 
do 

4.4673 
3.2388 
10.1363 

2.56 
2.32 
2  70 

.02040 
.01732 
01916 

.11436 
.07514 
27367 

.0005220 
.0004018 
0005173 

94105 

July  15 

5595 

2  67 

02543 

01494 

0006790 

94205 

July  16 

1  2117 

1  65 

01893 

01999 

0003124 

94206... 

.  .do 

7.5006 

2.78 

01866 

20851 

0005187 

94207... 

do 

13  7057 

2  86 

01909 

39199 

000.5460 

94208  
94406... 
94407... 

....do... 
....do... 
...do 

3.7828 
10.5556 
6.7664 

3.10 
2.47 
2.07 

.01175 
.01923 
.01615 

.11727 
.26073 
.14007 

.0003642 
.0004749 
0003343 

91806. 

94606  :; 

....do... 
....do... 

.7319 
11.8435 

1.95 
1.80 

.01307 
.07.544 

.01427 
.21319 

.0002549 
.0013576 

Average.  . 

July  16.2 

5.1354 

2.87 

.01869 

.14452 

.0005222 

108 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  31. — Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing 

period — Continued. 


DATES  RIPE:  JULY  19  TO  23,  1903. 


Record  number. 

Date 
ripe. 

Yield 

(grams). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram)  . 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels 

Average 
kernel. 

17409... 

July  21 
July  20 
July  21 
do 

14.  8957 
.3885 
2.  1462 
9.  9070 
2.4690 
.2806 
4.1516 
5.8080 
.8478 
17.  1820 
.4336 
2.  7255 
17.  2324 
3.8811 
4.  2376 
1.8276 
2.9999 
2.  0162 
2  5601 

2.75 
4.70 
2.02 
2.77 
2.58 
3.15 
2.90 
3.45 
2.59 
2.71 
3.84 
2.60 
2.80 
3.09 
2.71 
2.61 
2.80 
2.88 
2.91 
1.61 
2  81 

0.01857 
.01340 
.  01567 
.  02282 
.02024 
.02806 
.01837 
.01641 
.01437 
.01968 
.01399 
.01793 
.02390 
.01748 
.01859 
.01792 
.  01667 
.02145 
.  01939 
.  02194 
.01921 
.02110 
.01598 
.01913 
.02319 
.01988 
.01373 
.01264 
.01806 
.01919 
.02543 
.  01692 
.01635 
.01828 
.01846 
.01965 
.01999 
.01712 
.02233 
.  01934 
.01814 
.01984 
.02239 
.01724 
.  01832 
.02191 
.02484 
.02036 
.02270 
.  01869 
.01217 
.  01927 
.01975 
.01312 
.  01605 
.01895 

0.  40964 
.01826 
.04335 
.  27443 
.06399 
.00884 
.  12039 
.20038 
.02196 
.46563 
.  01665 
.07086 
.  48250 
.  11992 
.  11484 
.04995 
.08400 
.05807 
.  07450 
.  17948 
.  06424 
.22251 
.  01382 
.  08522 
.  18540 
.  18789 
.02002 
.  00462 
.04452 
.  27765 
.  34524 
.  08742 
.18596 
.09082 
.45299 
.29079 
.  63422 
.20970 
.22628 
:  07644 
.11328 
.09030 
.  69688 
.18538 
.  19253 
.  19936 
.56666 
.  15986 
.  20518 
.  27823 
.  24213 
.01654 
.  25873 
.13118 
.  10650 
.  08965 

0.  0005108 
.  0006296 
.  0003164 
.  0006181 
.  0005221 
.0008839 
.0005327 
.0005660 
.  0003722 
.  0005334 
.  0005371 
.  0004662 
.  0006692 
.  0005402 
.  0005037 
.  0004677 
.  0004667 
.0006177 
.  0005644 
.  0003533 
.  0005399 
.  0005549 
.  0007273 
.0005394 
.  0006475 
.0005148 
.  0004352 
.  0001846 
.  0004408 
.  0004567 
.0007299 
.  0005568 
.0004906 
.  0007696 
.  0004799 
.0005031 
.  0005464 
.  0003698 
.  0005426 
.  0003674 
.  0006510 
.  0008767 
.  0005531 
.0003414 
.  0010241 
.  0004668 
.0009588 
.0007105 
.0005154 
.  0005644 
.0005417 
.  0004471 
.  0006773 
.  0003332 
.  0004977 
.0004719 

17505 

18805 

20707  

20708 

July  20 
July  21 
July  20 

21211  

21306..  .. 

21308 

21710  

July  21 

21711 

22209  

do 

26806 

July  20 
do.. 

26807  

26808 

do 

26906 

July  22 
July  20 
do 

26907  

26909 

32606  

July  22 
July  21 

33105 

33905  

do... 

11.  1476 
2.  2862 

33906  

do 

38606 

do 

8.4605 
.3037 
3.0228 
6.  7665 
7.  2545 
.6316 
.3161 
1.8246 
11.6655 
12.  0278 
2.  6571 
6.  1989 
2.  1571 
17.4226 
11.  3592 
23.  1471 
9.  7084 
•9.3120 
4.  0230 
3.  1555 
2.0430 
28.  2136 
9.3629 
3.4442 
9.  1522 
14.6802 
4.  5806 
9.  0386 
9.  2130 
5.4411 
.7130 
7.  5438 
4.9315 
3.  4356 
3.6006 

2.63 
4.55 
2.82 
2.74 
2.59 
3.17 
1.46 
2.44 
2.38 
2.87 
3.29 
3.00 
4.21 
2.60 
2.56 
2.74 
2.16 
2.43 
1.90 
3.59 
4.42 
2.47 
1.89 
5.59 
2.13 
3.86 
3.49 
2.27 
3.02 
4.45 
2.32 
3.43 
2.66 
3.10 
2.49 

38607  

.  do 

38608 

do 

38609  

....do 

38706  ..  . 

July  20 
July  21 
..  do 

40405 

42206  

44607 

July  20 
July  21 
July  20 
do 

48106  

48305 

48306  

48706 

do 

55007  

....do 

55008  

55206 

July  21- 
do 

58805  

July  20 

59606 

63107  

..  do 

63505.  ... 

July  21 
July  20 
do 

66008 

69305  

71905 

do 

72606  

..  do 

72607 

do 

72705  

....do 

72706  

do 

72707 

July  21 
July  20 
July  21 
July  20 
do 

72708  

74507 

76206  

84905  

84906... 
85206  

...do... 
July  21 
do 

92405 

94209  

.  .do 

Average.  . 

July  20.1 

6.5399 

2.93 

.  01886     .  18064 

.  0005482 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  23  TO  27,  1903. 


17305... 

July  23 

3.  6302 

3.03 

0.  01984 

0.  10999  0.  0006010 

17306  

..  .do 

3.9968 

3.09 

.  01645 

.  12350    0005082 

17308 

do 

1  2275 

3  25 

02012 

03994    0006540 

17406  

...do... 

2.0907 

3.29 

.  01686 

.06878  '  .0005547 

17408  

.  .do  . 

9.2038 

2.18 

.01852 

.20065    0004037 

17410 

do 

16  9987 

2.88 

02285 

48957    0006580 

20705... 

...do... 

1.8517 

3.09 

.  01698 

.05722   .0005249 

20706..  

do 

3.3138 

2.78 

.02033 

.09212    0005652 

20710  

20805 

....do... 
do 

17.1115 
14  6942 

2.83 
3  32 

.  01974 
02157 

.48428   .0005586 
48784  ;   0006999 

| 

YIELD,    ETC.,    AS    AFFECTED    BY    GROWING    PERIOD. 


109 


TABLE  31. — Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing 

period— Continued. 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  23  TO  27,  1903— Continued. 


Record  number. 

Date 
ripe. 

Yield 
(grams). 

Percent- 
age of 
protein 
nitrogen. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 

Protein  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Ken-els.      &' 

21307... 

July  24 

Jufv   23 
r^n 

2.5691 
1.6420 

9.2850 
7.7296 
2.5712 

1.9090 
6.4102 
3.9797 
1.3746 
5.3615 
2.1851 
14.4630 
.3089 
6.  1026 
8.1268 
9.  1498 
13.5556 
1.6799 
1.  2124 
3.6302 
3.6003 
1.2499 
5.9990 
2.5235 
4.0358 
.7532 
1.5298 
8.3935 
.5958 
.4701 
2.3982 
.6893 
4.8988 
2.  4731 
7.4516 
2.5436 
.5952 
1.3451 
9.6451 
8.3406 
3.0940 
2.6615 

3.04 
2.45 
2.33 
2.47 
3i  22 
3.18 
2.76 
2.96 
3.08 
2.90 
2.91 
3.02 
2.94 
2.35 
2.03 
•       2.73 
2.84 
2.89 
5.85 
4.69 
3.11 
3.17 
2.94 
2.90 
1.91 
4.18 
1.84 
2.54 
3.54 
2.80 
3.30 
3.10 
2.87 
.      3.18 
2.95 
3.01 
1.87 
3.25 
2.30 
2.56 
3.21 
3.00 

0.01796 

.<)•_>    .V.I 

.02381 
.02141 
.01720 
.01619 
.01966 
.02073 
.01833 
.02206 
.  02512 
.02111 
.01716 
.01919 
.01930 
.  01972 
.02219 
.  0107.5 
.  01987 
.01871 
.02011 
.01866 
.01764 
.02035 
.01834 
.01712 
.01234 
.01756 
.01986 
.01343 
.01085 
.01723 
.01814 
.01118 
.02730" 
.01082 
.01701 
.01212 
.02079 
.01699 
.02242 
.01706 

0.07810     0.0005461 
.03778        .0006514 
.21634       .0005547 
.19092       .0005289 
.08086       .000.5538 
.06071        .0005144 
.17692       .0005427 
-.11780       .0006135 
.04234        .0005646 
.15549       .0006399 
.043.59       .0007309 
.43679       .0006376 
.00908       .0005045 
.14341        .0004510 
.16498       .0003919 
.24979       .0005383 
.38505       .0006273 
.04855       .0005712 
.07093       .0011627 
.17026       .0008776 
.11197       .0006255 
.03650       .0005447 
.17637       .0005187 
.07318       .0005902 
.07708       .0003504 
.03148       .0007155 
.02815       .0002700 
.21319       .0004460 
.02109       .0007032 
.01316       .0003761 
.07914       .0003581 
.02137       .0005342 
.14060        .0005207 
.07859       .0003556 
.21982  •     .0008052 
.07656       .0003258 
.01113       .0003180 
.04272       .0003938 
.22184       .0004781 
.21352       .0004349 
.09932       .0007197 
.07985       .0005118 

21705  
21706 

21709...                   ...do. 

22206  
22208  
20006 

....do... 
....do... 

July   24 
do 

26908  

27507 

Julv   23 
...do. 

27509 

28806                           do 

28806  do... 

33106...            .           do 

33107                            do 

33405  do 

34205                             do 

34207... 
38606 

....do... 
Julv  24 
Julv   23 
do..  . 
dn 

38606 

40205  
40305 

42905  do 

44505.                           do 

44606                              do 

45606  do 

45705                             do 

45805  ..     do 

46107  
50705 

....do... 
do 

50706  

do 

50905 

do 

55205... 

July  24 
do 

57805. 

57905... 
58505..    . 

....do... 
Julv  23 
do 

58705 

60605  

do 

62805   . 

do 

74606... 
74607  
91305 

....do... 
....do... 

July   24 

92505  

Average.  . 

July  23.2 

4.9015 

2.93 

.01878. 

.13654       .0005544 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  27,  1903,  OR  LATER. 


17.307  July  27 

3  1454 

3  46 

0  02279 

0  10883     0  0007886 

17405...  do 

15  6996 

2  13 

02127 

33441         0004531 

17506  do... 
17.507  ..  do 
18905  do... 
20709  do... 
21205...                        do 

2.2881 
.7720 
1.4864 
5.3229 
2  3642 

3.52 
3.80 
3.81 
3.05 
3  16 

.02460 
.01795 
.01443 
.02063 
01922 

.  0C044       .  0008660 
.02934       .0006822 
.05663       .000.5498 
.  16235       .  0006292 
07471         0006074 

21206  do... 
21207...  ...do... 
21208  do 

2.8564 
2.3066 
5  1594 

5.23 
2.96 
3  24 

.01917 
.01955 
01798 

.14939       .0010026 
.  06804       .  0005766 
16712         0005824 

21209  do... 
21210  do 

1.4484 
3.9143 

3.61 
5.03 

.01627 

01.577 

.05228       .0005875 
.  19689       .  0007934 

21212..  do 

1  7216 

2  16 

02049 

03718         0004427 

2130.5  ...do... 
22207  do.  . 

6.2514 
3.  2787 

2.67 

•'  77 

.020087 

01940 

.  16691        .  0005.350 
.  09082       .  0005374 

25205  do 

in  7836 

2  71 

ii-jw, 

28560       .0005599 

25206  do... 
26106  do... 
26107...                  ..  do 
26805  do 

4.6754 
2.  0737 
2.0390 
4  9456 

2.76 
2.63 
3.92 

."A'-] 

.02304 
.01416 
Q2248 

.12904       .0006295 

.(1.54.54        .0006060 
.H7UM        .000.5551 
13897         0006317 

28206  do... 
32208  do... 
32207...  ...do  .. 
32805.  ..  ..do 

4.  3698 
10.4036 
1.2573 
:,  Z26fl 

l.M 
3.  4> 
1  20 

.01996 
.02052 
.0182 
i  Q323 

.  1341.->        .0006126 
.  ivvtl        .0003714 
.0437.-.        .<XX  KW41 
.  06272         0002788 

1 

110 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  31. — Yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length  of  growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES  RIPE:  JULY  27,  1903,  OR  LATER— Continued. 


Record  number. 

Date 
ripe. 

!     Yield 
(grams). 

W'SSK 

pargoete°ifd     ^er- 
nitrogen.    (gr»em) 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

32608 

July  27 
do.  . 

1.0183 
3.  1346 
7.  0889 
1.  1132 
7.  0596 
8.  1890 
2.  8903 
4.  1281 
6.  1962 
5.0200 
6.  1394 
8.  0905 
1.2069 
3.  3004 
.9452 
2.  5134 
12.  1088 
21.  5399 
9.  3541 
1.9218 
1.8862 
4.6383 
4.  1546 
1.  8494 
1.  4892 
2.8000 
1.  4464 
1.  1271 
4.  6146 
1.  6103 
4.  3615 
1.2716 
.6760 
1.  7280 
3.  7407 
1.9469 
2.  3031 
7.  1828 
2.  3986 
7.6690 
13.  5696 
2.4420 
12.  0136 
8.  4415 
8.2929 
2.  6462 
.5572 
14.  2986 
4.4222 
.4096 
.8172 
8.  4407 
15.  7835 
4.  5737 
1.  2391 
8.  7448 
3.  4766 
3.0282 
7.  6241 

3.78 
3.41 
1.62 
1.39 
2.39 
2.21 
3.22 
4.33 
3.12 
3.88 
2.96 
2.64 
2.34 
2.93 
2.53 
2.84 
3.61 
2.11 
2.88 
2.93 
3.02 
2.37 
2.82 
3.63 
3.07 
2.92 
4.13 
2.86 
3.00 
2.54 
3.13 
3.24 
3.62 
3.57 
3.11 
1.88 
2.43 
2.12 
2.44 
2.63 
2.50 
5.82 
1.66 
3.36 
2.95 
2.48 
2.39 
2.92 
1.98 
2.73 
2.60 
2.35 
1.81 
2.62 
3.31 
2.48 
2.60 
2.56 
2.63 

0.01851 
.02090 
.  02271 
.  01446 
.  02345 
.  02144 
.  02125 
.  01994 
.  02213 
.  01880 
.  01987 
.  01972 
.  02155 
.01710 
.  02555 
.  01808 
.  02252 
.02089 
.02093 
.  02869 
.01699 
.01341 
.  02444 
.  01967 
.02251 
.  02258 
.  01555 
.02049 
.  01775 
.  01964 
.  01652 
.  01898 
.  02939 
.01516 
.01732 
.02049 
.  01355 
.01880 
.  01568 
.02073 
.02047 
.02220 
.  02153 
.  03963 
.  01929 
.  01585 
.02229 
.02291 
.02047 
.  01781 
.  01434 
.  01695 
.  02165 
.  01862 
.01721 
.  02043 
.01625 
.01495 
.01749 

0.  03849 
.10689 
.11223 
.  01547 
.16872 
.18098 
.  09307 
.  17875 
.  19332 
.  19478 
.  18173 
.23998 
.  02824 
.  09670 
.  02391 
.07138 
.  43713 
.  45435 
.  21399 
.  05631 
.  05696 
.  10967 
.11716 
.  06713 
.  04572 
.  08176 
.  05974 
.03223 
.  13843 
.  04090 
.  13652 
.  04120 
.  02436 
.06169 
.11636 
.  01660 
.  05596 
.15228 
.  05853 
.  20170 
.  33923 
.  14213 
.  19943 
.28363 
.  24464 
.06563 
.  01332 
.  41752 
.  08756 
.01118 
.  02125 
.  19836 
.  28569 
.11710 
.  04101 
.  21687 
.  09039 
.  07964 
.20052 

! 
0.  0006998 
.  0007126 
.  0003679 
.0002009 
.  0005605 
.  0004738 
.  0006843 
.  0008635 
.0006904 
.  0007295 
.  0005881 
.  0005327 
.  0005053 
.  0005010 
.  0006433 
.  0005135 
.  0007764 
.  0004407 
.  0006027 
.  0008404 
.  0005132 
.  0003177 
.0006892 
.  0007142 
.0006927 
.  0006594 
.0006423 
.  0005861 
.  0005324 
.  0004988 
.  0005171 
.  0006149 
.  0010640 
.0005411 
.  0005386 
.  0003853 
.0003292 
.  0003986 
.  0003825 
.  0005451 
.0005117 
.0012921 
.  0003574 
.  0013316 
.  0005689 
.  0003930 
.  0005327 
.  0006539 
.  0004054 
.  0004862 
.  0003728 
.  0003982 
.  0003919 
.  0004879 
.0005697 
.0005067 
.  0004224 
.  000:3923 
.  0004599 

33305... 

33407. 

do 

33408 

dn 

33605...    .                    do 

33606                            do 

33607  do 

34405                             do 

34606...                   ...do... 

36905.                            do 

37305... 

...do... 

37705...    . 

.  .  do 

37706 

do 

37707... 
37905 

....do... 
Aug.     4 
July   27 
do 

38005... 

38505 

39205... 

.:.do... 

39405  

..    do 

39506 

Aug.    4 
July  27 
do 

39507... 

39606 

40505... 

....do... 

42205 

do 

42405  do... 

43405  
43505 

....do... 
Aug.    4 
July   27 
do 

44605  

46105 

46106  do... 

48705.      ..                    do 

49505                            do 

49805  do.. 

50906                            do 

55508  do... 
58806                            do 

58905  do... 

59605  .                         do 

63506                            do 

66005  do.    . 

69506                            do 

69805  1.  .  do... 

69806                            do 

72405  do... 

72406  .                         do' 

72905                            do 

73307  do. 

73308                            do 

74305  ...  do... 

74506                            do 

74508  do... 

76205  ...cdo..J 
80305                              Go 

81405  do...; 
81406                               dn 

84405  
85205  
86105  
86106  

....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 

Average.  . 

July  27.2  ,      4.66?6           ^2.94 

.  01992 

.  12854 

.0005800 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    HEAD    TO    YIELD,   ETC. 


Ill 


TABLE  32. — Summary  of  yield  and  nitrogen  content  of  grain,  tabulated  according  to  length,  of 

growing  period. 


Plants  grouped  according  to 
date  ripe. 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Average 
date  ripe. 

Yield 
(grams). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

July  7  to  11 

49 
65 
50 
56 
52 
83 

July  8.  9.. 
July  13... 
July  16.  2. 
July  20.1. 
July  23.  2. 
July  27.  2. 

9.9067 
7.6611 
5.1354 
6.5399 
4.9015 
4.6636 

2.69 
2.81 
2.87 
2.93 
2.93 
2.94 

0.02024 
.01887 
.01869 
.01886 
.01878 
.01992 

0.26475 
.20820 
.  14452 
.18064 
.13654 
.12854 

0.0005356 
.0005290 
.0005222 
.0005482 
.0005544 
.0005800 

July  11  to  15  

July  15  to  19         .           .... 

July  19  to  23 

July  23  to  27  

July  27,  or  later 

TABLE  33. — Summary  of  nitrogen  content,  etc.,  tabulated  according  to  yield  per  plant. 


Plants  grouped  according  to 
yield  (in  grams)  . 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Average 
date  ripe. 

Yield 

(grams). 

Percent-    J^ 
age  of 
proteid      .  fgf  . 

nitr^en-  <£S. 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Below  1 

31 
67 
88 
04 
52 
20 

July  20.  2. 
July  21.  9. 
July  20... 
July  18.  3. 
July  15.1. 
July  15.  1. 
July  14.  5. 

0.6049 
1.  7673 
3.5683 
7.6706 
12.  2573 
17.  1908 
23.7186 

2.91       0.01683 
3.09         .01852 
3.03         .017% 
2.68         .01997 
2.71         .02168 
2.54         .02103 
2.55         .02159 

0.01731 
.05456 
.10794 
.20270 
.33433 
.43921 
.60401 

0.0004916 
.0005730 
.0005445 
.0005351 
.0005774 
.0005382 
.0005450 

1  to  25 

2.5  to  5  

5  to  10 

10  to  15  

15  to  20 

More  than  20 

TABLE  34. — Summary  of  yield,  etc.,  tabulated  according  to  nitrogen  content. 


Plants  grouped  according  to 
percentage  of  nitrogen. 

Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 

Average 
date  ripe. 

Yield 
(grams). 

Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 

Weight 
of  aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 

Proteid  nitrogen 
(gram)  in— 

Kernels. 

Average 
kernel. 

Below  1.5  

4 

25 
18 
47 
82 
67 
47 
20 
23 
25 

Julv22.5. 
July  18.  5. 
July  19.  8. 
July  17.3. 
July  16.  3. 
Julvl9.6. 
July  21.  2. 
July  20.  7. 
July  21.  5. 
July  19.  5. 

5.8099 
2.7423 
8.9542 
7.3389 
8.0817 
5.9093 
4.4497 
4.6756 
3.6486 
4.5431 

1.35 
1.80 
2.12 
2.39 
2.63 
2.85 
3.11 
3.37 
3.68 
4.72 

0.01709 
.02124 
.02030 
.02000 
.01938 
.01910 
.01824 
.01870 
.01852 
.01819 

0.07290 
.11620 
.19070 
.18478 
.21280 
.16609 
.13847 
.15189 
.13513 
.21239 

0.0002266 
.0003867 
.0004325 
.0004773 
.0005102 
.0005454 
.0005667 
.0006213 
.0006807 
.0008639 

1.5  to  2 

2  to  2.25  

2.25  to  2.5.. 

2  5  to  2.75 

2.75  to  3  

3  to  3.25 

3.25  to  3.5  

3.5  to  4...      . 

More  than  4 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    HEAD    TO    YIELD,    HEIGHT,    AND 
TILLERING  OF  PLANT. 

The  size  of  the  head  has  always  been  considered  to  be  closely  con- 
nected with  the  productiveness  of  wheat.  The  well-known  work  of 
Hallet  in  increasing  the  yielding  qualities  of  wheat  is  perhaps  the 
best  example  of  wheat  improvement  by  the  selection  of  plants  having 
large  heads.  Whether  large  heads  or  a  large  number  of  medium- 
sized  heads  on  a  plant  are  more  desirable  is  still  a  question. 

Table  35  gives  the  yields,  etc.,  of  between  300  and  400  plants,  tab- 
ulated according  to  the  number  of  kernels  on  the  head.  Table  36 
is  a  summary  of  these,  while  Tables  37  and  38  consist  of  the  same 
data  tabulated  according  to  the  yield  per  plant  and  yield  per  head, 
respectively.  . 


112 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


It  will  be  seen  from  Table  36  that  the  heads  of  slightly  more  than 
medium  size  produced  the  largest  yields  of  grain;  that  the  weight  of 
the  average  kernel  did  not  increase  with  the  size  of  the  head,  nor  did 
it  decrease  except  on  the  very  largest  heads;  that  the  plants  with 
somewhat  more  than  average-sized  heads  were  the  tallest,  and  that 
the  plants  with  medium-sized  heads  or  slightly  less  tillered  most 
largely. 

Table  37  shows  that  with  an  increased  yield  per  plant  there  is  a 
constant  increase  in  the  height  and  tillering  of  the  plant. 

Table  38  indicates  that  the  yield  per  head  and  yield  per  plant  do 
not  increase  together,  but  that  the  largest  yielding  plants  are  those  of 
medium  yield  per  head.  The  same  would  seem  to  be  true  of  the 
height  and  tillering  of  the  plant.  The  weight  of  the  average  kernel 
increases  quite  uniformly  with  the  yield  per  head. 

In  considering  these  results  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  these 
plants  were  grown  6  inches  apart  each  way,  and  were  therefore  not 
under  the  conditions  that  would  obtain  in  a  thickly  drilled  or  broad- 
casted field,  where  lack  of  ability  to  tiller  would  be  compensated  for 
by  the  larger  number  of  plants.  However,  the  variety  of  wheat 
yielding  best  in  Nebraska  is  one  having  only  a  medium-sized  or 
even  small  head,  as  compared  with  most  wheats,  but  it  is  a  strong- 
tillering  variety. 

TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant, 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  BELOW  16  KERNELS. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Sire  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(grams). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(grams)  . 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

17308 

15.2 

1.2275 

0.  3069 

0.02012 

59 

5 

17406  

15.5 

2.0907 

.2613 

.01686 

65 

11 

18805  
20708 

15.2 
13.6 

2.  1462 
2.4690 

.2385 
.2743 

.01567 
.  02024 

65 
60 

18 
11 

21211  

10.0 

.2806 

.2806 

.02806 

45 

2 

22209  
26805  

15.5 
15.7 

.4336 
4.9456 

.2168 
.3533 

.01399 
.02248 

70 

68 

6 
26 

32207  
37905........ 
39506  
42206 

13.8 
12.3 
11.2 
12.5 

1.2573 
.9452 
1.9218 
.3161 

.2515 
.3151 
.3203 
.1580 

.01822 
.  02555 
.  02869 
.01264 

47 
52 

48 
63 

5 
3 
6 
5 

44607  

12.6 

2.5235 

.2281 

.  02035 

52 

12 

48408  
49905 

13.5 
11.5 

.3485 
.6760 

.1742 
.3380 

.01291 
.02939 

45 
49 

3 
2 

50705  

15.0 

.5958 

.2979 

.01986 

40 

3 

73307  
74506  
94105  

12.5 
12.5 
11.0 

.5572 
.4096 
.  5595 

.2786 
.2048 
.2797 

.02229 
.01781 
.02543 

46 
68 
51 

4 
2 

1 

Average  .  . 

13.3 

1.3169 

.2654 

.02059 

55.2 

6.9 

SIZE  OF  HEAD,  16  TO  20  KERNELS. 


17410  

19.1 

16.9987 

0.  4358 

0.02285 

84 

46 

21205 

17.6 

2.  3642 

.3378 

.01922 

55 

10 

21305 

16.4 

6.2514 

.3290 

.02004 

65 

21 

21307  
21705 

17.9 
19.3 

2.5691 
1.5420 

.3211 
.5140 

.01796 
.02659 

53 
73 

10 
3 

21710 

19.7 

.8478 

.2826 

.01437 

59 

5 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    HEAD   TO    YIELD,   ETC.  113 

TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tittering  of  plant — Continued. 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  16  TO  20  KERNELS-Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Size  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grama). 

YiPlrt  npr     Weight  of 
average       Height 

«*£•  S  <cm)- 

Tillering. 

21807... 

18.8 
18.8 
16.8 
19.0 
18.0 
19.9 
18.0 
18.7 
19.0 
19.8 
19.0 
17.6 
19.5 
18.8 
18.3 
17.7 
19.0 
17.5 
18.4 
19.2 
17.7 
17.7 
16.3 
17.4 
19.0 
19.1 
18.5 
19.0 
17.3 
19.9 

9.4172 
3.2787 
1.9090 
4.2376 
2.9999 
1.3008 
.3089 
1.2069 
.2063 
2.5134 
.3037 
3.0228 
6.7665 
1.8494 
1.1271 
2.5235 
.9701 
.4701 
5.7948 
7.9968 
5.  7431 
10.9073 
4.7117 
3.  7810 
.8172 
7.3993 
1.5355 
3.6926 
2.6615 
2.8356 

0.4709           0.02498 
.3643             .01940 
.2727    |         .01619 
.3531     ;        .01859 
.3000             .01667 
.3972             .01996 
.3089             .01716 
.4023             .02155 
.2063             .01086 
.3591             .01808 
.3037             .01598 
.3359             .01913 
.4511             .t)2309 
.1699    i         .01967 
.3757             .02049 
.3605             .02035 
.2425             .01276 
.2350             .01343 
.3219             .01751 
.3076             .01603 
.3023             .01709 
.4195             .02361 
.2945             .01801 
.2701             .01550 
.2724             .01434 
.4933             .02578 
.3839             .02075 
.3357    >         .01767 
.2957    :         .01706 
.3544             .01783 

77 
65 
57 
70 
50 
80 
43 
42 
50 
53 
56 
60 
65 
68 
53 
52 
55 
38 
75 
85 
70 
84 
67 
88 
50 
86 
69 
73 
68 
70 

25 
16 
8 
16 
10 
26 

o 
7 

11 
6 
6 
3 

5 

34 
40 
35 
42 
17 
28 
4 
20 
4 
15 
12 
8 

22207 

22208  

26906  

26000..  . 
28206  

33106 

37706 

3790H  
38005  

38607 

38608  

38609   . 

42205 

44605  

44606 

48405  

50706.        .     . 

55905 

55906  

56105 

66207... 

57307  

69705 

74508  

81708 

88608  
92207  

92505 

95510  

Average  .  . 

18.4 

3.7758               .3383             .01862            64.1 

i                       1                       i 

13.7 

SIZE  OF  HEAD,  20  TO  24  KERNELS. 


17305...        22.9 

3.6302 

0.4538 

0.01984 

1 
61 

12 

17408.          23.  7 

9  2038 

4383 

01852 

73 

24 

17507  21.5 
20705  21.8 

.7720 
1.8517 

.3860 
3703 

.01795 
01698 

78 
55 

4 
6 

20706          23.  3 

3  3138 

4734 

02033 

61 

7 

20707  21.1 

9.9070 

.4718 

.02282 

75 

22 

20709  23.5 
21207          23  6 

5.3229 
2  3066 

.4839 
4613 

.02063 
01955 

67 
60 

13 
g 

21212  21.0 

1.  7216 

4304 

.02049 

50 

5 

21306          22.6 

4  1516 

4152 

01837 

60 

11 

21707  23.3 

12.3685 

.4947 

.02125 

90 

24 

21708  20.5 

9  2850 

4887 

02381 

85 

26 

i  21809          20  9 

8  0214 

4011 

01919 

84 

25 

C  21811.  21.0 
21812          22  9 

11.9114 
14  8139 

.4412 
3445 

.02101 
01507 

87 
90 

29 
54 

21907  22.6 
22205  23.6 

2.9248 
2  6965 

.4178 
.2247 

.0185! 
.00953 

82 
80 

8 
54 

26106          22  5 

2  0737 

5184 

02304 

60 

9 

26806  21.7 

2.7255 

.3894 

.01793 

56 

12 

26807          21  8 

17  2324 

.5222 

.02390 

76 

40 

27207...        20.7 

3.3266 

.4158 

.02004 

75 

9 

27307...        23.8 

3.0850 

.4407 

.01847 

80 

10 

27505          21  6 

12  0399 

4815 

02183 

84 

38 

28805  21.7 
33105.         22.0 

2.1851 

2.  seal 

.5463 
.4267 

.02512 
.01939 

65 
65 

6 

12 

33405          23  4 

8  1268 

4515 

01930 

68 

20 

33407  21.8 

7.0680 

.5063 

.02271 

67 

18 

33906          23.8 

2.2862 

.4572 

.01921 

67 

9 

38606          22  3 

8.4605 

.4700 

02110 

71 

24 

38706  21.5 
40405..  .       23.0 

7.2545 
.6316 

.4267 
.3158 

.01088 

.01373 

75 
54 

30 
3 

43505          23.2 

1.4464 

.3616 

01555 

45 

3 

t.->  ii.-,         X  .; 

.7081 

2360 

01161 

55 

g 

45705  22.0 
48106  21.0 
48305          23.  6 

.7532 
11.6655 
12.0278 

.3766 
.4023 
6014 

.01712 
.01919 
02543 

58 
79 
81 

6 
39 

28 

18406          22  6 

3  2964 

2997 

01324 

68 

13 

48507  23.3 

1.6036 

.5345 

.02296 

63 

7 

27889— No.  78—05 8 


114 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  ofhead  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant — Continued. 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  20  TO  24  KERNELS— Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Size  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(grams). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

48806 

21.0 

9.8346 

0  3782 

0  01798 

78 

12 

55205  
55606 

20.0 
22.9 

.6893 
11.0930 

.3446 
.5042 

.01723 
.  02205 

56 
92 

6 

24 

55907 

21  4 

19  3966 

5542 

02590 

95 

42 

55908...  
55909 

23.4 
21.5 

12.  2210 
9  2120 

.5092 
.6580 

.02175 
.03050 

95 

85 

40 
31 

56205  

23.8 

6.  5232 

.4659 

.  01959 

82 

29 

56206 

20.4 

9.3093 

.3724 

.  01829 

86 

42 

56208  

22.5 

13.  5720 

.5429 

.02356 

88 

51 

56209  
57005 

21.1 
22  0 

15.  8086 
1.5364 

.3513 

.3841 

.01664 
.  01746 

90 
73 

67 

7 

57105  

23.9 

3.  7263 

.2192 

.00916 

85 

40 

57305 

22.8 

8.  5777 

.3899 

.  01666 

78 

30 

57300 

21  7 

7  9772 

3989 

01838 

80 

23 

57308  
5750(> 

21.4 
22  5 

9.  8378 
2  7616 

.3644 
.3452 

.01705 
.  01534 

80 

72 

40 
18 

57507  
57508 

23.9 
22.3 

6.9861 
12.  0728 

.4657 
.  7102 

.01946 
.03177 

78 
85 

26 
22 

63105  

22.5 

1.5452 

.3883 

.01717 

68 

8 

63106  
63107 

23.6 
21  9 

3.3006 
9.3120 

.4715 
.4901 

.02001 
.  02233 

77 
80 

9 
25 

72605  
72705 

21.7 
21  9 

1.1166 
9.  1522 

.3722 
.5384 

.01718 
.02191 

52 

68 

3 
20 

74305  

21.6 

4.4222 

.4422 

.02047 

60 

11 

74507 

20.5 

9.2130 

.3839 

.  01869 

70 

27 

74605  

21.0 

7.  1181 

.3746 

.01784 

69 

27 

74606..  .  . 

23.2 

9.  6451 

.4822 

.  02079 

75 

24 

76205 

21  7 

8.4407 

.3670 

.  01695 

70 

26 

81405  

21.8 

4.  5737 

.  .4158 

.  01862 

70 

11 

81705 

21.1 

9.  7922 

.4451 

.  02106 

82 

27 

81706  

21.2 

15.  3928 

.4527 

.  02132 

90 

40 

81707  
81709 

23.8 
20  5 

18.3614 
16.4692 

.5564 
.4451 

.02336 
.02175 

96 
90 

53 

45 

84405  
88607 

23.8 
23.4 

8.  7448 
5.1584 

.4858 
.5158 

.02043 
.  02205 

75 
73 

19 
15 

91905  
91906  
92206  1.. 
92305  
92306 

22.0 
22.2 
23.0 
22.9 
23.1 

3.4436 
3.  5486 
1.  1074 
2.3859 
6.0091 

.3826 
.3943 
.5537 
.3408 
.4006 

.01739 
.01774 
.02407 
.01491 
.  01732 

72 
74 
66 
65 
75 

12 
11 
3 
.  11 
19 

92506  

22.9 

3.8709 

.3871 

.01690 

77 

16 

92507. 

22.0 

9.  6779 

.4208 

.01916 

82 

29 

Average. 

22.2 

6.8466 

.4355 

.01953 

73.8 

21.4 

SIZE  OF  HEAD,  24  TO  28  KERNELS. 


17306... 
17405 

24.3 
25.1 

3.9968 
15.  6996 

0.3997 
.5414 

0.  0164 
.0212 

17409  

24.3 

14.  8957 

.4514 

.0185 

20710  
21206 

25.5 
24.8 

17.1115 

2.  8564 

.5032 
.4761 

.0197 
.0191 

21308  
21706 

25.3 
26.9 

5.8080 
19.3318 

.4149 
.6444 

.0164 
-  .0239 

21709 

25.8 

7  7296 

.5521 

.0214 

21711  

24.2 

17.  1820 

.4773 

.0196 

21806  
21808 

24.9 
25.7 

14.  2450 
19  7446 

.  5935 
4388 

.0237 
.0170 

21810  

26.0 

1.0304 

.  5152 

.0198 

21913 

27.3 

10.  1925 

.5662 

.0207 

22210  

27.1 

6.0173 

.5470 

.0201 

26808  

24.7 

3.8811 

.4312 

.0174 

2C905 

25.1 

6.4102 

.4931 

.0196 

26908  

24.0 

3.9797 

.4974 

.0207 

27205  
27305 

26.2 
24.3 

16.4061 
5.  5666 

.4825 
.5061 

.0184 
.0208 

27506  

24.7 

10.  0005 

.5556 

.0225 

27507 

25.0 

1.3746 

.4582 

.0183 

27.508... 
32608  

27.9 
27.5 

5.5324 
1.0183 

.  6137 
.5091 

.0228 
.0185 

33107 

24.5 

6.  1026 

.4694 

.0191 

33305 

25.0 

3.  1346 

.5224 

.0209 

33406  

25.7 

4.6045 

.4186 

.0162 

33408  

25.7 

1.  1132 

.3711 

.0144 

0.  01645 

66 

12 

.02127 

72 

34 

.01857 

85 

39 

.01974 

77 

39 

.01917 

62  ;      6 

.01641 

54  !     14 

.  .02390 

88  !     38 

.02141 

85 

23 

.  01968 

85 

51 

.  02378 

91       32 

.01708 

96 

57 

.01982 

55       4 

.02072 

84 

27 

.02019 

78 

31 

.01748 

64  i  -    11 

.01966 

66  i     15 

.02073 

62 

9 

.01841 

87       57 

.02085 

80  !     22 

.  02252 

85 

23 

.01833 

50  :      4 

.02287 

78  i     19 

.01851 

50       2 

.01919 

73       29 

.02090 

53  1      7 

.01627 

72       16 

.01446 

56 

A 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OK    HEAD   TO    YIELD,    ETC. 


115 


TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant — Continued. 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  24  TO  28  KERNELS— Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Size  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(grams). 

Wciglit  of 
average 
kernel 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

33605 

27.4 

7.0596 

0.6418 

0.02345 

65 

14 

3360t> 

27.3 

8.1890 

.5489 

.02144 

72 

17 

33607  

27.2 

2.8903 

.5781 

.02125 

58 

6 

33905 

26.7 

11.1476 

.5867 

.02194 

77 

23 

34207  

26.6 

13.5556 

.5894 

.02219 

77 

22 

37705  
39507  
45606  

25.6 
27.8 
24.4 

8.0905 
1.8862 
4.0358 

.4495 
.4715 
.4484 

.01972 
.Olt.99 
.01834 

60 
59 
59 

22 
4 
13 

48306 

26.2 

2.6571 

.4428 

.01692 

58 

7 

48407  
48409  

26.6 
26.2 

11.2890 
6.4302 

.4181 
.5358 

.01572 
.02048 

82 
74 

53 
19 

48505 

27.4 

1.9154 

.3831 

.01398 

70 

7 

48606 

27.4 

11.2008 

.5091 

.01858 

80 

36 

55506     ..   .   . 

27.1 

17.8506 

.5578 

.02062 

95 

58 

56107  
57509  

24.9 

27.8 

14.4556 
10.6261 

.3023 
.4830 

.01P.58 
.01739 

90 

S4 

49 
37 

57606 

26.4 

3.0790 

.6158 

.02333 

78 

8 

57607 

27.3 

16.4433 

.6090 

.02234 

87 

48 

57608           .   . 

24.3 

8.6189 

.4788 

.01968 

83 

38 

.>>(„. 

24.7 

1.3961 

.2327 

.00943 

75 

29 

63506  

25.5 

2.3986 

.3998 

.01568 

64 

7 

65305 

26.0 

1.8018 

.f»006 

.02310 

65 

10 

65306  

25.9 

9.8298 

.4681 

.01807 

75 

28 

65308  
66008  
69505  

26.5 
24.9 
25.5 

11.7066 
3.1555 
4.7116 

.5321 
.4505 
.4712 

.02008 
.01814 
.01847 

77 
76 
66 

35 
8 
13 

69805 

27.5 

2.4420 

.6105 

.02220 

62 

7 

69806  

27.9 

12.0136 

.6007 

.02153 

75 

28 

72606 

27.1 

9.3629 

.4681 

.01724 

82 

26 

72607 

26.9 

3.  4142 

.4920 

.01832 

74 

8 

72905  

27.8 

2.6462 

.4410 

.01585 

59 

5 

74*>07 

25.8 

8.3406 

.4390 

.01699 

76 

31 

80305  

25.1 

15.7835 

.5442 

.02165 

70 

33 

81406 

24.0 

1.2391 

.4130 

.01721 

55 

3 

81710... 

24.7 

9.1411 

.5713 

.02308 

90 

24 

84906  

25.5 

7.5438 

.5029 

.01975 

65 

16 

85205 

26.7 

•3.  4766 

.4386 

.01625 

65 

11 

86105  

25.4 

3.0282 

.3785 

.01495 

68 

4 

86108 

27.2 

7.  6241 

.4765 

.01749  ' 

76 

25 

886.06  
88C09  

25.3 
24.7 

9.9456 
9.8719 

1     .     .5234 
.5196 

.02068 
.02100 

85 
74 

23 

26 

B8906 

26.6 

5.3069 

.4824 

.01811 

82 

11 

92205  

26.5 

5.2616 

.4047 

.01525 

72 

18 

92405 

26.7 

3.4356 

.4294 

.01605 

78 

10 

92407 

•26.5 

.8983 

.4491 

.01C95 

68 

2 

92907  

24.3 

4.4673 

.4964 

.02040 

84 

10 

94206 

25.1 

7.5006 

.4688 

.01866 

76 

19 

94208  

24.8 

3.7828 

.2909 

.01175 

71 

19. 

94407 

26.2 

6.7664 

.4229 

.01615 

82 

23 

94907 

27.2 

12.  1918 

.5301 

.01948 

85 

23 

94908  

25.0 

2.3678 

.4736 

.01894 

73 

9 

94909 

24.2 

3.  6977 

.2631 

.01696 

72 

9 

95506  

25.9 

11.0548 

.4806 

.01852 

86 

25 

95507..    . 

26.0 

12.  1592 

.5527 

.02029 

90 

22 

96608 

25.5 

14.  4617 

.4987 

.019,54 

97 

31 

95705  

26.5 

'  10.3426 

.4309 

.01626 

80 

31 

95707 

26.0 

.  7.177 

.3788 

.01457 

67 

4 

Average. 

25.9 

7.5207 

.4848 

.01874 

73.8 

21.2 

SIZE  OF  HEAD,  28  TO  32  KERNELS. 


17505...    .    2 

9.0     0.3885 

0.3885 

0.01340 

H 

7 

17506          3 

1.0     2.2881 

.7627 

.03460 

55 

a 

20805  ...        3 
21208  2 

1.7     14.6942 
8.  7     5.  1594 

.6679 
.5159 

.02157 
.01798 

85 
63 

30 
11 

21209  2 

•  .7     1.4484 

.  1828 

.01627 

.'.I 

6 

21210..  .       2 

3.9143 

.  1803 

.01577 

59 

8 

21805          2 

9.3    20.9290 

.01699 

91 

48 

21905          2 

8.2    14.3111 

.5111 

.01809 

92 

62 

21906  3 

;     10.4800 

.8062 

,08663 

•  88 

27 

21908          2 

8.8     3.5574 

.5929 

DOOM 

92 

9 

21909          3 

)  '•>     12.1819 

.7166 

.03817 

86 

29 

21911  2 

8.4593 

.6597 

.02209 

90 

23 

116 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 


TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  of  Tiead  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant — Continued. 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  28  TO  32  KERNELS— Continued. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Size  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(grams). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

22206 

29.2  i 

2.5712 

0.5142 

0.01720 

70 

9 

22211 

28  0 

11  5675 

5784 

02062 

88 

59 

26107  

28.8 

2.0390 

.4078 

.01416 

67 

6 

27005 

28.9 

16  4120 

5471 

01895 

77 

40 

27206  

28.8 

19.1854 

.7106 

.  02469 

90 

49 

27306 

28.5 

13.3011 

.5542 

.  01945 

88 

48 

27308  
27509  
32206 

31.7 
30.4 
28  2 

4.5123 
5.3615 
10  4036 

.5640 
.6702 
5779 

.01777 
.02206 
.  02052 

88 
73 
71 

11 
9 

26 

32505  
32606 

28.1 
31.3 

5.  2268 
2.0162 

.  6533 
.6721 

.  02323 
.02145 

71 
69 

9 
3 

34205  

30.9 

9.  1498 

.6100 

.  01972 

78 

19 

34208  
37305... 
38505  

31.2 
30.9 
29.6 

2.9886 
6.  1394 
12.  1088 

.5977 
.6139 
.  6373 

.01916 
.01987 
.  02252 

66 
58 
70 

5 
12 
21 

38506 

28,3 

1.6799 

.5COO 

.01975 

54 

3 

38605  

30.5 

1.2124 

.6062 

.01987 

55 

2 

39405  
39606  
40305  

31.9 
31.4 

29.8 

9.3541 
4.6383 
3.6003 

.  6681 
.4217 
.6000 

.02093 
.01341 
.02011 

74 

64 
62 

18 
18 
6 

44505 

30.9 

5.9990 

.5453 

.01764 

69 

25 

45005  

29.4 

3.2340 

.4042 

.  01376 

66 

9 

45805  
46107  

31.0 
31.9 

1.5298 
8.3935 

.3824 
.5595 

.  01234 
.01756 

48 
79 

4 

27 

50905  
50906 

31.6 
28.5 

2.3982 
1.7280 

.3428 
.4320 

.01085 
.01516 

68 
58 

10 
5 

55005  

30.2 

7.9684 

.6129 

.  02028 

75 

19 

55006 

30.1 

7.1852 

.4790 

.01593 

80 

19 

55007  

29.5 

2.  1571 

.5393 

.01828 

65 

7 

55206 

30.4 

11.3592 

.5978 

.  01965 

82 

27 

55306 

30.6 

4  1323 

.5903 

.  01931 

77 

17 

55307  

31.1 

5.  6864 

.5169 

.  01663 

80 

19 

55507 

31.5 

9.  8228 

.6139 

.  01949 

95 

28 

56106  

28.0 

12.0161 

.5224 

.01866 

90 

33 

57006 

30.5 

-  10.  1836 

.4427 

.  01453 

88 

41 

57407 

31.8 

14  9992 

.6250 

.  01968 

92 

41 

58207  .... 

30.7 

4.  2207 

.4221 

.  01375 

75 

18 

58505 

31.1 

7.4516 

.6210 

.  02730 

80 

18 

58806  

31.7 

1.9469 

.6489 

.  02049 

65 

7 

59606 

29.8 

9.7084 

.5109 

.01712 

80 

37 

63505  

29.7 

4.  0230 

.5747 

.  01934 

66 

8 

65307 

31.1 

7.0051 

.5838 

.  01878 

74 

17 

66005  
69506  ..  .  . 

30.8 
30.1 

7.6690 
13.  5696 

.6391 
.6168 

.  02073 
.  02047 

75 
73 

22 
24 

71905 

29.3 

28.2136 

.6561 

.  02239 

80 

46 

72406 

30  7 

8  2929 

5923 

01929 

70 

15 

72706 

29.5 

14.6802 

.7340 

.  02484 

80 

27 

72707  
76206 

28.1 
29.8 

4.5806 
5.4411 

.5726 
.3627 

.02036 
.01217 

72 
73 

8 
30 

88906 

30.3 

9  9034 

.  5502 

.01814 

80 

21 

92408  

29.6 

3.7820 

.5403 

.  01827 

81 

7 

92908 

31.2 

3.  2388 

.5398 

.  01732 

76 

7 

94205  

31.3 

1.2117 

.4039 

.  01893 

55 

6 

94207  

29.9 

13.7057 

.5711 

.01909 

83 

31 

94209 

31.7 

3  6006 

.6001 

.  01895 

75 

7 

94406  

28.9 

10.  5556 

.5556 

.  01923 

82 

22 

94605  . 

28.0 

.7319 

.3659 

.  01307 

68 

7 

94606 

29  9 

11  8435 

5383 

07544 

84 

23 

94905  

31.8 

4.  4423 

.4936 

.  01553 

75 

11 

94906. 

29.8 

12.  3862 

.5385 

.  01808 

91 

24 

95706 

29.7 

5  1629 

5736 

01934 

82 

9 

Average. 

30.1 

7.4992 

.5598 

.01958 

74.5 

19.4 

RELATION    OF    SIZE    OF    HEAD    TO    YIELD,   ETC.  117 

TABLE  35. — Relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tittering  of  plant — Continued. 
SIZE  OF  HEAD,  32  TO  36  KERNELS. 


SIZE  OF  HEAD,  36  KERNELS  AND  OVER. 


Record  num- 
ber. 

Size  of 
head. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(grams). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

17307... 

34.5 

3.1454 

0.7863 

0.02279 

70 

8 

18905 

34.3 

1.4864 

.4955 

.01443 

50 

4 

26105  

2»'.907      .  . 

32.7 
34.0 

1.8242 
1.8276 

.4560 
.6092 

.01393 
.01792 

69 
55 

13 

8 

28806 

34.2 

14.  4630 

'    .7232 

.02111 

75 

30 

34405 

34  5 

4  1281 

6881 

01994 

62 

s 

34606  

35.0 

6.1962 

.  77  jr. 

.02213 

61 

13 

36905 

33.4 

5.0200 

.6275 

.01880 

58 

7 

39205 

32  2 

21  5399 

6731 

02089 

82 

40     ! 

42405   .... 

33.0 

1.4892 

.7446 

.02251 

60 

2 

42905 

33  5 

1.2499 

.6249 

.01866 

68 

4 

48506  
49505 

32.7 
33.5 

9.4585 
1.2716 

.5564 
.6358 

.01701 
.01898 

82 
60 

30 
3 

51005  

34.5 

15.5835 

.6233 

.    .01804 

75 

32 

55008     . 

33.7 

17.  4226 

.6222 

.01846 

82 

30 

55305 

33  4 

2  5160 

.SOS? 

.01507 

75 

12 

5530S.    .. 

33.1 

9.  5078 

.7923 

.02395 

79 

28 

06 

33.3 

10.9180 

.7279 

.02184 

89 

23 

55607  .   . 

34.5 

2.3931 

.5983 

.01734 

77 

7 

5560S 

33.5 

22.5848 

.9034 

.02699 

95 

31 

57007 

33  6 

3  3176 

.6635 

.  01975 

90 

9 

57406  
57408 

33.7 
35.0 

2.4923 
12.2004 

.6231 
.7177 

.01846 
.02047 

92 
90 

14 
26 

58805  

35.1 

23.  1471 

.7014 

.01999 

78 

51 

60605 

35.0 

.5952 

.5952 

.01701 

57 

4 

69305  
72405  

34.3 
35.5 

2.0430 
8.4415 

.6810 
1.4069 

.01984 
.03963 

70 
67 

7 

o 

72708 

33.2 

9.0386 

.  7532 

.02270 

78 

12 

73308  

34.7 

14.2986 

.7944 

.02291 

74 

23 

85206 

34.2 

4.9315 

.4483 

.01312 

69 

13 

S.%05  
91305  

34.5 
34.5 

1.6362 
3.0940 

.8181 
,7735 

.02731 
.02242 

70 

76 

3 

fi 

92208 

35.3 

6.6206 

.6621 

.01876 

78 

17 

92406  

34.5 

8.2366 

.7488 

.02168 

81 

17 

92409 

35.0 

5.7131 

.6348 

.01814 

81 

13 

92905 

35  2 

2  7000 

5400 

01534 

75 

6 

92909  
95509 

33.1 
34.5 

10.  1363 
2.9475 

.6335 
.7369 

.01916 
.02136 

86 
74 

21 
4 

Average. 

34.1 

7.2530 

.6868 

.02023 

73.9 

15.4 

18906 

65.0 

0  9229 

0  9229           0  01420 

67 

5 

21813  
34206 

43.2 
40.5 

4.0258 
1.5940 

.8051             .01877 
.7970             .01968 

80 
74 

21 
5 

377(17  
40205  

38.6 
38.8 

3.3004 
3.6302 

.6601             .01710 
.  7260             .  01871 

64 
65 

5 
11 

40505 

42.5 

4.1546 

1  0386             .02444 

60 

4 

43405  

41.3 

2.8000 

.9333     '        .02258 

64 

3 

46105.    . 

37.1 

4.6146 

.6592             .0177.5 

73 

s 

48705 

44  0 

4  3615 

7269             .  01652 

80 

•      7 

48706  
55508 

47.4 
36  0 

6.1986 
3  7407 

.7748             .01635 
.6222             .01732 

78 
73 

12 
12 

57405  

41.0 

.8328 

.8328             .02031 

73 

1 

57805.. 

38.6 

4.8988 

.6998             .01814 

76 

17 

57905 

36  8 

2  4731 

.4122     i        .01118 

74 

17 

58705  

58.  7 

2.5436 

.6359             .01082 

68 

11 

58905 

42.5 

2.3031 

.5758     !        .01355 

66 

13 

59605 

38  2 

7  1828 

.7183             .01880 

77 

30 

62805  

37.0 

1.3451 

.4484             .01212 

70 

14 

66000 

52.3 

6.0090 

.8584             .01642 

73 

12 

72806  

36.7 

2.0970 

.6990             .01906 

62 

5 

73306  .      . 

37.6 

8.5373 

.77»ii            .02062 

78 

20 

81505 

48.7 

2.8327 

.(•14.'             .01940 

78 

7 

84905 

37.0 

.7130 

.7130             .01927 

47 

4 

929<t6  

36.2 

2.8816 

.5763            .01592 

", 

7 

95505.. 

37.0 

.314*1 

.3  mi             .00850 

79 

3 

Average. 

42.1 

3.3723 

.7148             .01710 

71.0 

10.2 

118 


IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT, 


TABLE  35. — Summary  of  relation  of  size  of  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant. 


Classification  according  to 
number  of    kernels   on 
head. 

Average 
Number    number 
of  plants,  of  kernels 
on  spike. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Yield  per 
head 
(gram). 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram) 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

Below  16 

18  I          13  3 

1  3169 

0  2654 

0  02059 

55  2 

6  9 

16  to  20  

36             18.4 

3.7758 

.3383 

.  01862 

64.1 

13.7 

20  to  24 

80  |          22  2 

6.8466 

.4355 

.01953 

73  8 

21  4 

24  to  28..  >  

84            25.9 

7.  5207 

.4848 

.  01874 

73.8 

21.2 

28  to  32  

73            30.1 

7.4992 

.5598 

.  01958 

74.5 

19  4 

32  to  36 

38            34  1 

7  2530 

6868 

02023 

73  9 

15  4 

More  than  36  

25  <          42.1 

3.  3723 

.7148 

.01710 

71.0 

10.2 

TABLE  37. — Relation  of  yield  of  plant  to  height  and  tillering,  and  to  the  yield  per  head. 


Classification  according  to  yield  per  plant,  in 
grams. 

Number 
of  plants. 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

Yield  per 
head 
(gram). 

Below  1 

31 

0.6050 

56.5 

3.7 

0.  3553 

1  to  2  5 

67 

1.7673 

62.2 

7.0 

.4740 

25  to  5  

87 

3.  5526 

69.1 

11.6 

.4917 

5  to  10 

93 

7.  6485 

75.4 

22.1 

.5320 

10  to  15  

51 

12.  2862 

84.4 

32.3 

.5592 

15  to  20..     .                     

20 

17.  1908 

84.6 

42.9 

.5310 

More  than  20 

5 

23.  2829 

85.2 

43.2 

.6865 

TABLE  38.--Relation  of  yield  per  head  to  yield,  height,  and  tillering  of  plant,  and  to  weight  of 

average  Icernel. 


Classification  according  to  yield 
per  head,  in  grams. 

Number 
of  plants. 

Yield  per 
head 
(gram). 

Yield  per 
plant 
(grams). 

Height 
(cm.). 

Tillering. 

Weight  of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 

Below  0  300 

30 

0.  2484 

1.6939 

60.8 

11.4 

0.  01586 

0.300  to  0.400  

62 

.3567 

3.  7365 

65.6 

15.5 

.01737 

0  400  toO  500  

98 

.4524 

6.  7326 

72.8 

19.9 

.01847 

0  500  to  0  600 

78 

.5477 

9.  5646 

76.6 

21.8 

.  02073 

0  600  toO  700  

.50 

.6372 

7.6214 

74.3 

17.3 

.  02056 

0  700  to  0  800 

25 

.7456 

4.  4523 

75.2 

18.6 

.02179 

More  than  0  800 

12 

.9229 

5.7687 

73.7 

10.3 

.02151 

SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSIONS. 

As  between  wheat  kernels  of  the  same  variety  raised  under  similar 
conditions,  those  kernels  having  a  high  percentage  of  proteid  mate- 
rial have  a  lower  specific  gravity,  weigh  slightly  less,  and  occupy  a 
smaller  volume  than  kernels  having  a  smaller  percentage  of  proteids. 

As  between  individual  spikes  and  individual  plants,  the  same  rela- 
tions obtain. 

As  between  individual  plants  in  different  years,  these  relations  do 
not  hold. 

The  quality  of  high  proteid  content  and  its  correlated  properties 
may  be  due  to  immaturity  in  the  kernel,  or  they  may  belong  to  the 
normal  and  fully  ripened  kernel. 

As  between  kernels,  spikes,  and  plants,  those  kernels  of  greater 
weight  contain  a  larger  weight  of  proteids — this  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  they  contain  a  lower  percentage. 


SUMMARY    AND    CONCLUSIONS.  119 

Plants  bearing  the  largest  number  of  kernels  have  kernels  of  more 
than  medium  but  not  the  greatest  weight,  as  do  also  plants  producing 
the  greatest  weight  of  kernels.  The  same  is  true  of  plants  producing 
the  greatest  weight  of  proteid  matter  and  gluten. 

Heavy  seed  wheat  drilled  at  the  rate  of  1^  bushels  per  acre  pro- 
duced a  much  larger  crop  of  seed  the  first  year  of  the  separation  than 
did  light  seed  drilled  at  the  same  rate,  but  by  continuing  the  separa- 
tion of  the  respective  crops  and  selecting  heavy  seed  from  the  crop 
grown  from  heavy  seed,  and  light  seed  from  the  crop  grown  from 
light  seed,  the  difference  in  yield  in  three  or  four  years  was  small. 

After  the  first  year  of  separation  the  light  seed  produced  a  greater 
amount  of  proteids  per  acre  than  did  the  heavy  seed. 

A  determination  of  the  total  or  of  the  proteid  nitrogen  content  in 
the  kernels  on  one  row  of  spikelets  of  wheat  affords  a  fairly  close  esti- 
mate of  the  same  constituents  in  the  kernels  on  the  other  row  of 
spikelets. 

A  determination  of  the  total  or  of  the  proteid  nitrogen  content  in 
the  kernels  on  one-half  of  the  spikes  on  a  wheat  plant  will  give  a  very 
good  estimate  of  the  same  constituents  in  the  kernels  on  the  other 
spikes,  provided  there  are  at  least  an  average  number  of  spikes  on  the 
plant. 

There  may  be  quite  a  large  variation  in  the  proteid  nitrogen  con- 
tent of  different  spikes  on  the  same  wheat  plant. 

Determinations  of  the  proteid  nitrogen  content  of  800  spikes  of 
wheat  of  the  same  variety  representing  different  plants  showed  a 
variation  of  from  1.12  to  4.95  per  cent  of  proteid  nitrogen,  and  351 
plants  of  the  same  variety  the  following  year  varied  from .1.20  to  5.85 
per  cent. 

The  proportion  of  gluten  to  proteids  in  kernels  of  different  wheat 
plants  may  vary  considerably.  A  determination  of  proteid  nitrogen 
is  therefore  not  always  a  guide  to  the  gluten  content  of  the  wheat. 
Selection  for  improvement  should  be  based  on  the  determination  of 
gluten. 

Wheat  plants  having  kernels  high  in  gluten  contain  a  smaller  pro- 
portion of  other  proteids  than  do  plants  of  medium  or  low  gluten 
content. 

In  wheat  of  the  same  variety,  raised  in  the  same  field  in  the  same 
year,  the  ratio  of  gliadin  to  glutenin  was  practically  the  same  in 
plants  of  low,  medium,  and  high  proteid  nitrogen  content. 

It  may  therefore  be  assumed  that  an  increase  in  the  gluten  con- 
tent of  a  given  variety  of  wheat  raised  in  the  same  region  would  carry 
with  it  a  corresponding  improvement  in  its  value  for  bread  making, 
although  there  might  be  fluctuations  from  year  to  year  in  the  quality 
of  the  gluten. 


120  IMPROVING    THE    QUALITY    OF    WHEAT. 

The  content  of  proteid  nitrogen,  the  kernel  weight,  and  the  total 
proteid  nitrogen  production  by  the  wheat  plant  are  hereditary  quali- 
ties. 

There  is  a  tendency  for  plants  possessing  any  of  these  qualities  in 
an  extreme  degree  to  produce  progeny  in  which  the  same  qualities 
approach  more  closely  to  the  average,  but  certain  exceptional  plants 
may  transmit  the  same  or  more  extreme  qualities. 

The  yield  of  grain  per  plant  after  a  severe  winter  was  decreased  in 
proportion  to  the  susceptibility  of  the  plant  to  cold.  The  effect  of 
the  cold  caused  the  plant  to  produce  a  less  number  of  heads,  or,  in 
other  words,  to  tiller  less. 

The  early-maturing  plants  yielded  the  most  grain,  and  those  ripen- 
ing later  produced  in  each  case  less  when  grouped  into  ripening 
periods  of  four  days,  extending  through  more  than  three  weeks'  time. 

The  early-maturing  plants  produced  grain  of  slightly  lower  nitro- 
gen content  than  the  later  maturing  plants,  and  the  number  of  grams 
of  proteid  nitrogen  in  the  average  kernel  was  likewise  less  in  the 
early-maturing  plants. 

Plants  with  heads  of  slightly  more  than  medium  size  produced 
the  largest  yields  of  grain,  and  were  taller  than  plants  with  either 
larger  or  smaller  heads.  Plants  with  heads  of  medium  size,  or  slightly 
less,  tillered  most  extensively. 

The  weight  of  the  average  kernel  did  not  increase  with  the  size  of 
the  head,  nor  did  it  decrease,  except  on  the  very  largest  heads. 

The  largest  yielding  plants  were  the  tallest  and  tillered  most. 


U 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


THIS  BOOS  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


*»*«  31  1915 
DEC  22  1917 

SEP  23 

OCT24I921 


30m-l,'15 


